Science doesn't even try. Science cannot prove matters of faith any more than faith can prove matters of science. However the existence of life on other planets is not a matter of faith. It is a matter of probabilities.
Why doesn't he want to? Why does he hide? Why would God speak only to a few ancient people and not mass communicate with everybody now? Why would God start 5,000 different religions all over the earth if only one is True? Why don't miracles happen today? If God exists and sees no need to simply inform us all of what he expects from us, why would we imagine that he expects anything at all. Why would any being powerful enough to create the universe require homage from a single insignificant tribe of a single insignificant species on a single insignificant planet. I guess that's too many questions. Why wouldn't God want to communicate simply and directly with all people instead of only to self-proclaimed Holy Men?
Well said Red that encapsulates many of my reservations particularily the need for worship. I could believe in miracles, resurrection etc by an all powerful being after all if he created the universe he can overcome physical laws anytime he wants. The need for worship and lack of communication is what I have really struggled with in my search for god's existance. I guess the best argument I see now is that he started things in motion 13 odd billion years ago then is watching from "above".
Red, those are all great questions that need to be asked. I have to go right now so I'll tell you what I think a little later. If we could know him by absolute proof instead of through Faith, we'd all be like Stepford Christians. He gave us free will so that we could accept Him or reject Him. He doesn't make us do anything. Most of us would still disobey Him anyway. We're way too self centered.
God didnt start religions. Man did that. God is found in each persons heart and soul. But you have to be willing to look for it. If I was an atheist crazy person not scared of death. I'd go whack me some folks. Fuk fuk fuk the police. But since I'm worried about spending an eternity in hell I'm gonna let them slide. Now if I was catholic like the mafia. Shit. I'd pop a cap and say some Hail Marys.
Friends, I appreciate you trying to answer these deep philosophical questions about god and his motivations and shit, but would it really be so bad just to forget trying to make sense of god and just be rational and believe things that are true and just accept things that you do not know? Like if you don't know why you are here, just stop worry bout it and get on with it. Don't make shit upmthatndoesnt make any sense and then try to find some logic in it. Wy would god do this or that? Why require faith? Why create sinners? Why kill his kid ? Why does that forgive sins for people he created as sinners? Why want to be worshipped? Why why why. Just accept what the facts and reality of evidence and stop believing other crap. It's not so bad.
Right well maybe lunatics like you should stay religious if it is all at stops you from being an evil murderer
I'm not trying to push religion on anyone. I could really give a rats ass what other folks believe. I just don't want anyone pushing their beliefs on me. I think that's why there's a lack of respect on both sides. Same goes for abortions. I don't care what a woman does with her body. But if she expects taxpayers to pay for it then taxpayers should have a say in it.
This is what I get for living 8 or 9 time zones ahead and going to bed early. I'll try to catch up. I'll try again. Means don't matter much to me. What matters to me is how the means someone choses impacts each of us individually. If by some remarkable chance LSD or a pet rock helps me understand the mystery of the universe, or truth, that's great. Not likley, of course. Some means are doomed to fail. The rest will at best work some of the time. Christianity can make someone an intolerant, self-righteous jackass or it can make someone act humanely (subjective term, I admit). Same for Hinduism, atheism, etc. Which is why I focus much more on how a person acts and thinks. Means are just a sideshow, a distraction. They are not the end game. At least not according to how I view the issue. Bottom line, we disagree on how to define truth. You want to limit it to objectively verifiable facts and data. And as far as that goes, I agree with you. Science can't be ignored or disregarded. But I define truth, or the search for truth, more broadly, to inlcude subjecitve things that can't be measured. Which by definition opens me up to attack. It's the harder position to support. Understood and accepted. You can try to convince me that I'm better off in an asylum. I'll always listen. But if your idea of winning is to have me accept your limited scope of truth, then you're in for a long fight.
Intellectual cowardice. When you define your search for truth broadly, does it Include ouija boards and crystal balls, or doesn't it? Just how far are you willing to take this absurd idea that truth comes from anywhere? Seriously, how far does if t go? Can you answer? Astrology? Palm reading? Isn't being sane a limiter on the "scope of truth"? Painting sanity as closed minded is pointless. There is truth, and there is lies. And there is a way to tell the difference, and it has to do with evidence. If you tell me you believe in a crazy idea called quantum entanglement, and all the magical sounding things it means, I do not scoff, because you are talking about observation. But I do not extend that respect to shams and lies. I suspect you openness would cease to be so open when you have the choice of the medicine that works, or the faiths healer. But why be so "limited"?
