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

Start another dimension and work on whether sin is wrong. I don't mean it, but you need to the work.

I believe it was Robert Heinlein who said, "Sin lies in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other sins are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful, just stupid.)"

Heinlein could certainly handle words, but I wouldn't treat him as a moral arbiter.

According to Prof. S. Hawkins there may be 11 dimensions already. Hopefully most of those will be religion free.
According to Heinlein one mans religion is another mans belly laugh. (Have to agree with that too.)

big difference between religion and churchism. churchism is a bad influence. it breeds corruption and spanish inquisitions. and mistakes like 'sex is bad'

that doesnt mean God doesnt want prayers. should he exist, he wouldnt need them, but wouldnt get angry if he didnt get them. simple. religion is not pointless tho.

Can you explain the point of religion in the 21st. century? Apart from giving people something to fight and argue over!

does it need a point?

At the beginning of the twentieth century Christians were running scared of Charles Darwin's infamous Theory of Evolution. In America it was banned from being taught or mentioned in schools.

The ban was eventually lifted and even the majority of the Christian world had to concede that the evidence was overwhelming. However, those same Christains have spent the best part of a century figuring out how God can exist within a world of evolution.

They produced the conclusion that God him/her/itself had implemented evolution so that the human race (and the rest of the Earth's creatures) could develop independently and she/it/he could concentrate on other matters.

For me this hypothesis simply threw up more questions. Was God lying when he/it/she told the story of Genesis? or were the writers simply insane people hearing voices in their heads? If God cannot deal with these matters concurrently, how can it/he/she be omnipresent?

The most burning question this posed for me was 'If God has simply left us alone to evolve what is the point in worshipping him/her/it?' This theory clearly indicates that God cannot be omnipresent so, in an infinite universe, there is a very great chance that God is simply not listening.

At the same time the theory makes me wonder whether or not God really wants us to worship he/she/it.

There is no more or less point in religion in the 21st century than there was last year. (can of worms begins to swell)

An observation:
What I've noticed here is that when we're not talking about religion in general, we're only talking about "God". Not "gods", just the big singular Beard-in-the-Sky. I'm not saying this is a meaningless discussion (not by any means, except for that solipism bit) but shouldn't we bring in all the major religions to this? I mean, don't we have to do more than just debunk the Bible?
That was just a thought that popped in....

~Wes

You're right - I think. Most of us seem to be from Judaeo-Christian backgrounds (shoot me down if I'm wrong, you lurkers!) and we might just be dismissing what we heard at our mothers' knees. But the concept of god is potentially (?!) enormous, and other people's gods might be even harder, let alone things like Buddhism (trying to tread lightly here) where it might be more a theory of the universe with which the individual spirit being must interact rightly.

Although brought up in a Christian environment (Chapel every sunday then because my friends were in the church choir, I left chapel to join the church.) but from a very early age I have been interested in eastern philosophies and have practiced Yoga, Zen, Tao etc.
I have studied world mythology and religion, eastern and western mysticism and taught meditation.
I have also studied physics, astronomy and other science related subjects as well as astrology, psychology and metaphysics.

Alji

oi! wesley! evolutioon in NO WAY disproves Christianity!

anyone except certain moronic america fundamentalists believe that the bible is literal and that the world was created in seven days. genesis, like many old jewish trexts was deliberately metaphorical. this is proven. genesis is not meaningless but not 'true'. like much of the rest of the bible. somewhere in the bible it say that pi is 3. this is obviously not true, despite tenessee once trying to pass a law that it should be...

why should God not have chosen evolution? if he is omnipresent in time, he would know what we would evolve into. and he also perports to have given us free will. why not nature as well?

I didn't express any opinion about whether evolution disproves God or not. I simply explained the Christian reaction to the theory of evolution and their subsequent quest to prove that God and evolution can co-exist.

The only opinion I expressed was wondering whether God really wants to be worshipped. You say God could be omnipresent in time and could see what we would evolve into. Surely then God's intention was that we all evolve into athiests, as is currently happening.

assuming God is omnipotent, then of course he can see thru time. and if he gave us free will, we are free to become atheists. and believe me, there are still many many christians. and if he is benign he would appretiate praise if not need it. it is a throw back to aincent religions that thought that gods needed sustainance thru praise or something.

all this of course i conjecture. im an agnostic

assuming God is omnipotent, then of course he can see thru time. and if he gave us free will, we are free to become atheists. and believe me, there are still many many christians. and if he is benign he would appretiate praise if not need it. it is a throw back to aincent religions that thought that gods needed sustainance thru praise or something.

all this of course i conjecture. im an agnostic

This is back to school stuff, and I went to a Jesuit Catholic school!

If god knows everything and is everywhere and can do anything, then can god make a race of people who choose their own way? Can god set off a race of people who can have their own children who can choose to make their own way (subject to fights with the parents)?

God can therefore cause anything in the possible universe to happen - including what I do - unless I choose to do otherwise. But then god knew what I would do, so what I did was because god intended it to happen, so it isn't free will.

I think you have to discover what you perceive God to be. Do I believe in God as a living being? I'm afraid not.

However the concept of God could be an unwitting (or even knowing) metaphor for the universe and science. The universe is omnipresent and omnipotent. The universe created all life and all objects and shaped them into what they have become.

This was not through some mystical power, but through the mathematically based movements of atoms (or rather, the electrons and quarks that make up atoms).

Isn`t it amazing how quickly discussions on religion (whichever) and God (whatever that is to you) descend into nonsence and declarations of faith (parental brainwashing). I find it easy to understand why our ancesters cowering in a cave in the dark, cold and hungry, weary and frightened by the noises in the night would pray to survive until daybreak.
I find it less understandable that educated overfed people of this century still fear the dark and the unknown.
Its funny that we are capable of understanding random events, such as, `He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.` But when the general randomness of the universe is proposed suddenly its `Oh no, everything has a purpose.`
Its this truly randomness that frightens people today. That fact that good and evil are destroyed in a plane/train crash
is something people can`t accept because it could happen to them, or their loved ones. Good people die through bad luck and evil people survive through good luck. The cold unquestioningly random events of the world terrify otherwise intelligent people. Some soldier under fire once said `There are no atheists in a foxhole.`

One of my favorite ideas is one that I read in a Redfield book. It talks about how there are really two different schools of thought used to describe the world we live in and the people who live there.

The school of science who sought to prove everything about the world using logic, equations, and proofs.

The school of religion which sought on an intuitive level in some cases, on a very real and living basis on other occasions, to describe the world and all within it.

He makes the claim that science has made such great leaps through the passage of time we've only just begun our discoveries while simultaneously claiming that religion is only just stepping up to the plate to fill in the void left empty by science.

It begs the question that perhaps both schools are really better off being used together. Much more to contribute in that fashion.