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

Wait Higg's Bosun
you forgot about the Mormonites. i got beset by these madman in South America, and wouldn't let me leave until i received their "bible". they said to me "did you know that Jesus christ was actually here in the Americas?" mmmm must have missed that bit. The bible itself was about a guy who had a vision about "the truth of the past" and then wrote it all down for masses to believe (only in the Americas of cource though).
just makes you realise how far self delusion can go.

Noggin
No I haven't read The Celestine Prophecy. Will loook it up.
Perhaps a truth is something that people come to realise without any general contact with each other. A sort of an agreement arrived at without coercive explanations.
But here here with the general daftness of attempting any acurrate statistic re life on earth as we know it.
I just remember that even spontaneity has a cause and every cause a will behind it.

"Jesus Christ was an American" say a bunch of Americans.
"The Jews are god's chosen people" say the Jews.
"White people are superior" say (some) white people.

It's Sooooo depressing.


Noggin

hey blickybadger
your point is spot on but are you sure that number is right???
1 / 10 to the 160000th power for the probability of primordial soup occuring. people without much maths can't begin to understand how small that number is. putting it in perspective the number of atoms in the universe is approximately 10 to the power of 86 (plus or minus 10 to the power of five) i don't want to sound religious but that seems a bit too unlikely. why don't you fiddle the numbers a bit for convenience sake

Ah yes, the Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)...

Imagine the early discussions:

Church of the what? What does it mean anyhow, 'Latter Day'? ... Well why not say so? ... Yes, I am serious... No, I just think it's a bit long... Can't we cut it down a bit, make it more snappy? ... Well I don't know, what about 'The Church of Jesus Christ'? ... Who already used it? ... Really? well I didn't know. All right, what about 'The Mormons'? ... OK, OK, no need to use that kind of language... No, I'm not criticising you, it's just that... Oh, well then I'm sorry... Yes, really... OK, 'I apologise'... No, some guys gave me the idea... well if you'll listen, I'll tell you... All right then. I was walking to the shops and they shouted "Nya nya, you're a f***ing Mormon!!", and I thought to myself, 'Yes - I suppose, in a strange sort of way, perhaps I am...' ... Yes, I am being serious... OK, if you've got a better name, let's hear it... all right then, 'The Mormons' it is...

These are the ones that send their youngsters out come to your door in very conservatively cut suits and crew-cuts, looking like FBI men who lost their shades, or IBM salesmen of the early 70s... First time it happened, I nearly flushed my stash! I was out of there before I got a chance to find out what they wanted. Turns out they must've lost their God, because they wanted to know if I'd found Him...

These people have their headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah - in fact they own the place. There they have established the largest database of human names, addresses, and relationships on Earth. If your name is on a mailing list somewhere (and who's isn't?), they'll have a copy of it. Spooky.

Their President James E. Faust says:

"The New Testament is 'a better testament' because so much is left to the intent of the heart and of the mind and the promptings of the Holy Spirit. This refinement of the soul is part of the reinforcing steel of a personal testimony of Jesus Christ."

This sounds to me like "Read into it whatever you like, it's cool with us, so long as you're a cool, hard dude..."

Which is fine with me, by the way. Oh yes.

He also said:

"Whether we are young or old, single or married, whether we have children at home or have become empty nesters, family home evening can increase unity and love in our homes..."

Well I'm a single empty nester, and family home evening is one lonely place to be, I can tell you... No way can I get any more unity into my family home evening

Nah, I'm just kidding... Yes, really... well OK, maybe not... no, really, I was... etc.

So where's my drink? What, I finished the bottle already? D'oh!!

What are the chances of getting croutons with that?

Or parmesan cheese?

I know a bit about the Mormons... they are very, very determined. And don't mind marrying more that one women. I know the term for it, but I'm not bothered to spell it at the time.

Higgs -

>>One example of a religious law you may feel contradicts the 'law' of the Christian bible, is the strict Sharia law of stoning to death of a woman for sex outside marriage. Isn't that murder in the Christian ethic?<<

Such an instance is brought up in the New Testament. An adulterous woman was going to be stoned, and Jesus interceded, with the famous phrase, "Let He who has no sin throw the first stone."

The stoning that Christ prevented is perscribed by the OT. The laws agree, but where they differ is with Christ. If I had a little time, I could probably link the two together and where they split off, much as Judeism did, but until then, yes, they differ. I would say that God's Son would know what He was talking about, but then again, they would not believe that He is God's Son. (This is an assumption. I've never heard of the Sharia.)

Christianity believes that every word of the Bible is the truth. Written through men, by the Holy Spirit, it is the Word of God. Otherwise, it would have no authority. Translations are often simplified, or misenterperated altogether, but when taken in the manner in which they were meant, things are a lot less confusing.

There is a verse that Pro-Choice people use that proclaims that if a man strikes a woman, and she miscarriges, as long as the woman suffers no harm, the man is to only pay out the fine determined by a judge. They see this as an a legalization of abortion, because the baby is killed by a man, and it is not called a sin.

However, the word interperated as miscarriges, when translated properly, means "to come out," meaning that the baby is born early. Quite a big difference from the death of the child. Such is how people misread God's word.

One thing that I would remind you of is that religions are made by man, and thus are subject to error. Religion is designed to respect God, and is not God Himself.

>>Which set of laws is correct?<<

As for the answer for this, you already know and expect it. I would say the law that God has laid down, and more or less updated by His Son, is correct.

Perhaps I'm just rambling, as I suspect I am. Part of this is because I don't have much of an idea of what you're trying to get at, beyond the inability for us to correctly judge which set of religious rules are correct. As for that, well, I've no idea. The only way to properly determine that would be to debate the two religions, but I don't think that's what we are doing.

Sorry, folks. This isn't up to my usual par, but I'm suffering from a very nasty headache, and my thinking isn't very clear at the moment. I may have to give this another shot later... ug.

<(((><

> I'm pretty sure no unborn child would want to die, any more than
> you or I would want to have died then.

Pretty sure, eh? What makes you so sure that an unborn child can even formulate the concept of death, let alone a desire to avoid it, when they don't even achieve a concept of self until some months after birth, lack future projection, and remain totally egocentric for at least two more years (Piaget)...

Unless you mean "Imagine an unborn child with an adult's capacity for self awareness and future projection" which doesn't seem particularly useful. Or perhaps the instinctive reflexes of the unborn indicate their unspoken desires - this kick of the foot says 'I don't want to die'?

> Translations are often simplified, or misenterperated altogether,
> but when taken in the manner in which they were meant, things are a
> lot less confusing.

Er, you may want to rephrase that. Translations are/were made, simplified, and/or misinterpreted *precisely in order to find out* what was meant...

thats brilliant higgs. thanks for cheering up my day.
it's interesting to see all these different religions throughout the world with totally wide ranging views, with each group believing the others are all wrong, but at the time of judgement they will come over to "see the truth".
Are you from the States then Higgs? I'm from england but i'm interested to know what they think of aetheists there. That will be me . I've heard you're shunned from society because Mel Gibson believes, so anyone who thinks opposite MUST BE EVIL and must be crushed by the righteous hand.....or am i just exaggerating a bit??

sorry my reply was to your mormon topic

>>As I said, different people have different opinions and views. He knew it was *against the law*, but by his moral code he was doing right by saving lives ('doing God's work' - didn't you read his statement?). His apparent lack of guilt or remorse, and his willingness to die happy with his action indicate that he did not believe what he did was wrong.<<
It doesn't make any difference, Higgs, he was still wrong. He was in for one heckuva shock, in my opinion, when he died! To that extent, it doesn't matter what he believed...
>>For a different example, Iraqis who broke Saddam's repressive laws would not necessarily be considered criminals in the West.<<
It depends. Knowing how repressive the current American 'theocracy' is, one has gotta wonder.
If the issue is sin, and one's consciousness of it, I maintain that everyone knews deep down that she has sinned, it's just a matter of who'll admit it, even to themselves...

Because of a particularly vicious flaming my sister was subjected to when she got involved in discussing abortion, I am hesitant - but here goes...
Unborn children past about 5 months development feel pain. They don't want to be ripped apart, any more than a puppy wants to be, when nasty boys tie firecrackers to its limbs...
We have no way to know what an unborn child can think, but I am sure they can and do - having had three children. Piaget could observe only from the outside, as is true of most students of child development when he was working! His experimental design was very basic, and his study population consisted only of his *own* children - he did well considering his limited resources. I sure, I am *certain* that whether or not reincarnation is true, pre-existence *is*. All unborn children are 'planned' from their point of view, regardless of ours. So they're pretty peeved to be ejected early - incarnatus interruptus, you could call it...

Got to agree with you there Della
Higgs you don't have to have developed a personality or a sense of self for a primitive survival mechanism to kick in.
In fact where is the 'will' driven from in a foetus to continue to grow I wonder. There is certainly no individual thought process going on as an egg attaches itself to the lining of the womb and yet this happens and certainly not by happy accident or evolution as defined as the survival of the fittest.
so that survival mechanism, attaching itself to a food source, has no thinking behind it's action. Does not require a fully functional brain to work the magic. It works on survival.
The death of a foetus is the death of potentiality .

http://64.4.8.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=5ac99764a8790dbed969b4d8ced98da7&lat=1062823627&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2enear%2ddeath%2ecom%2fexperiences%2fresearch10%2ehtml

A very long near death link

Noggin
I had a quick look at web descriptions of that book you assumed I'd read. It might surprise you but when I see the words 'new age' I steer very clear. I don't read about roads less travelled or tarot or prophesy and I'm sorry to say this and hope it doesn't offend, but would not be tempted to read this kind of book if it's written by an American , because somehow, even if they have a really worthwhile idea/thoughtful concept, somehow they always seem to turn it into a money making vehicle, get carried away, name themselves and start a 'religion'. And I'm itchy skinned allergic to all labels. I don't want to be a member of a gang. I equate all religions with committees and they never get anything done, since they can never completely agree and then have to schizm into something else.
Myst
I was trying to see if you'd answer the question about abortion, whether it is something that is completely intolerable and forbidden by the Christian faith as you prescribe to it or whether you believed it was a matter of personal choice dictated by circumstances.
I note you very rarely say "I think" in reply to a question, which is another problem I have with religion. Somehow they do not like the individual to say "I think." and often refer to a biblical quotation in answer so as to avoid thinking I presume. Many religions do not seem to want members who want to think for themselves. All their thinking is done for them it seems.
As I've said before, any decent moral human being can come up with the ten commandments and probably add some more that would define sensible living on this planet.

Math

>>You know as well as I do that if you get more than four pagans in a room you:
a) must be in a pub,
b) you're in for a "my dad's bigger than my dad" pissing contest,
c) or a session of 'saccharine solidarity'.<<

Hey! You've been spying on me!!!

>>And my gods are your gods old girl, unless Baldur and Tyr have changed shirts mid-game .<<

LOL - I bow down to your superior wisdom, now as ever, Math.

I don't have time for this thread now I'm back at work, and I am missing it already. However, today I am going to jump in a big car with a druid who teaches sword-fighting, hop off to a walk with a group of reconstructionist pagans (with a pub in there somewhere...) stay over with a heathen and more mixed pagans and eventually end up in a sleeping bag on a floor...

I'm sure that
1) Woden will appreciate the amount of mead involved
2) Bragi will NOT appreciate the quantity of Rhymster's share verse that gets sung... You really should come and join Chantsudbeafinething, Math, the archives are a hoot...
3) The saccharine will flow once the mead has settled.

Not sure about the pissing contest - but we have shamans, druids, Greek recons, Celtic recons and druids as well as heathens and at least one ex-wiccan, so the chances are pretty high, I would think...

And on Sunday we're going to the Mines of Moria (Alderley Edge)

Don't ya wish you were here?

Jez - polytheist, heathen, witch and bitch.

And appalled, as you are, at the thought of the number of people the middle-eastern despot has conned into his cult...

(Sorry, guv - Loki made me say it...)

Jez

Math

>>You know as well as I do that if you get more than four pagans in a room you:
a) must be in a pub,
b) you're in for a "my dad's bigger than my dad" pissing contest,
c) or a session of 'saccharine solidarity'.<<

Hey! You've been spying on me!!!

>>And my gods are your gods old girl, unless Baldur and Tyr have changed shirts mid-game .<<

LOL - I bow down to your superior wisdom, now as ever, Math.

I don't have time for this thread now I'm back at work, and I am missing it already. However, today I am going to jump in a big car with a druid who teaches sword-fighting, hop off to a walk with a group of reconstructionist pagans (with a pub in there somewhere...) stay over with a heathen and more mixed pagans and eventually end up in a sleeping bag on a floor...

I'm sure that
1) Woden will appreciate the amount of mead involved
2) Bragi will NOT appreciate the quantity of Rhymster's share verse that gets sung... You really should come and join Chantsudbeafinething, Math, the archives are a hoot...
3) The saccharine will flow once the mead has settled.

Not sure about the pissing contest - but we have shamans, Greek recons, Celtic recons and druids as well as heathens and at least one ex-wiccan, so the chances are pretty high, I would think...

And on Sunday we're going to the Mines of Moria (Alderley Edge)

Don't ya wish you were here?

Jez - polytheist, heathen, witch and bitch.

And appalled, as you are, at the thought of the number of people the middle-eastern despot has conned into his cult...

(Sorry, guv - Loki made me say it...)

Jez

Della, I'm going to throw a philosophical argument at you which agrees with what you say. Whatever the unborn feel, maybe they are part of the community that Rawls envisages. It's a question of what they would want, everyone else having equal priority and nobody knowing whether they were unborn, Bill Gates or what.

The real question is whether they are part of the 'human race'. We could anaesthetise the foetus before abortions if pain was considered to be a problem in itself.

Well, let's think about it, then. I'm assuming they have the same genetic layout as a human, which one way or the other should probably make them human.