[Closed] God and the Afterlife......?

So billions of people are terrified of gay people and hate women?

What about humans who worship a slug god?

If there is an afterlife, one that we can still exist as individuals in, it will go on for ever won't it? So its either sitting on a cloud playing a harp, chatting to your Dad, going on the ultimate MTB ride or just contemplating the ineffableness of everything . . . for ever.

I imagine that could get quite boring, especially after the first 10,000 years. Unless you could watch events unfold I the "real" world. It would be the ultimate reality TV show. You could sit there tutting and saying "it wasn't like that in my day".

But then after a trillion years the universe wold come to an end and it would be back to boring again.

There is plenty of atheists who hate women and homosexuals.

@ the ppl slating aggressively arguing athiests.... Say you knew someone who came to you one day very happy because they had won the jamican lottery and that all they needed to get the money was to email their bank account details. If you knew that the jamican lottery was a farce, wouldn't you tell them that it was load of old rubbish?

😀

Has anyone ever won the Jamaican lottery in this manner.... ? Of course not

OK but I can tell you as someone who until a few years ago, ( just like you, others on here and possibly most) was basically an atheist ... that I am now more content, calmer, feel wonderfully free and basically just much happier than I have ever been.

Not a bad lotto win really, wouldn't you say ?

And the best part is you don't have to invest any money, just a bit of time and an open mind

There is plenty of atheists who hate women and homosexuals.

an open mind

Ooh. I almost... al... most.........

But still. Nah.

that I am now more content, calmer, feel wonderfully free and basically just much happier than I have ever been.

Sedation

Or anti-depressants

Sorry , but the concept of someone on STW having an open mind is hilarious!!

jekkyl - Member

Can you believ in heaven but not believe in God?

To OP ... think about it ... (I have not read the rest of the threads)

1. There is no creator God but there are [u]many Gods[/u].

2. There is no all knowing science but [u]learning beings[/u].

3. There is [u]no such thing as heaven without hell[/u] because without one or the other we would not have existed.

4. There is other explanations [u]beyond [/u]that of Abrahamic faith.

To answer your question.

Yes, there is heaven but there is also hell.

Can't have everything you know ... maggots go to the latter to be squashed for fun - squeal maggot squeal!

😈

Obviously FOG,you're on here.

For the fear of boring others who’ve heard it before... sorry

Wanted to get my kids in the very good (turns out to be brilliant) church school which meant church attendance.

Now it occurred to me at the time, I can either go to church with resentment (meant giving up sunday morning rides) and thoughts of it's utter bobbins or go down there with an open mind as see what it's all about.

So some of it was heavy going and felt myself turning my nose up at parts of it ( Forgive my sins etc etc … I haven’t sinned what you on about ?? But it gets explained/you work it out for yourself) but some of it touched a nerve … the be excellent to each other and yourself bits.

So the weeks past and then found myself feeling happier while I sat in there with my family around me then the old pie and liquor gives the mustard seed sermon and I think ... "alright then, go on, lets do the confirmation course I don’t have to commit at the end of it… again, what have I got to lose…. Give it a try…."

It was around this point I told the vicar I didn’t believe in God … maybe not the smartest thing to do when you’re trying to get your kids in his school… but what I did tell him was I thought there was more to life than a massive flat screen tele and a flash motor…. Guess I was already on my way.

But here's the thing ...I still don't believe in what I thought God was back then.... Strangely enough I'm not stupid enough to think there's a sky wizard sitting on a cloud somewhere.

But I have been clever enough to learn and found out myself, through my own experience, that God exists.

And my life is better for it

Peace out

Ro5ey - Member

But I have been clever enough to learn and found out myself, through my own experience, that God exists.

Peace out

Which one? The one who "created" everything? You are confused.

However, if you believe there are many Gods then you are safe.

You can't have it all.

I think I am in the God exists group, as I simply can't believe in the infinite, which means that God in some form or another exists; as you can't argue with physics.

Some people on the other hand are happy to take the leap of faith and believe in an infinite universe. Their choice, and I don't mind; just seems a bit daft to me, like someone believing in giving 110% percent.......

Thing is with Science is the more we find out, the less we realise we know, so to say if science can't prove it then it doesn't exist is stupid as that assumes we already know everything their is to know, where in actual fact we know next to nothing.

chewkw - Member
Ro5ey - Member
But I have been clever enough to learn and found out myself, through my own experience, that God exists.

Peace out

Which one? The one who "created" everything? You are confused.

So you believe the Universe is infinite? If not, then yes their must be *one*.

Unless you are in the group who thinks that nothing is something, so there was something before the big bang which may have caused our existenance but that's a massive leap of faith, even bigger than believing in a 'god', or you are happy to *believe* the universe has no limits and will continue growing forever, which makes no sense to me

so to say if science can't prove it then it doesn't exist is stupid

Most sensible criticism centers not on the existance of a deity, but rather the non falsifiable nature of such a claim and if a claim is non-falsifiable then I for one think it can be dismissed until such time as it becomes falsifiable. See Russell's teapot.

There is no doubt that many religious people do a lot of good in the world and that they feel their lives are improved by having their faith. This does not mean that there is a god.

So why are we here then?

Unless like I said you believe that the universe is endless, which is a massive leap of faith

So why are we here then?

Why would you think that there has to be a reason?

richc - Member

So you believe the Universe is infinite? If not then yes they must be *one*.

I am not a person of science nor a person of God, but I accept that there are people who are strictly scientific and there are people who are adamant of the "creator".

Both have their own explanations but I do not fall into any of those two.

Unless you are in the group who thinks that nothing is something, so there was something before the big bang which may have caused our existenance but that's a massive leap of faith, even bigger than believing in a 'god'

There is not such thing that can appear without previous causation put it bluntly. You have to find the way yourself.

Because:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

If the universe isn't a closed system, ie: its just really mind numbing massive but not infinite. Then unless you don't believe in Physics their must be a god, or else we don't exist.

Which is one of the reasons a lot of brilliant scientist throughout history had to change their minds about the existence of 'god', such as Newton, Darwin and Einstein.

It ain't as simple as 'I don't believe, so it can't be true', your opinion (as does mine) doesn't actually matter that much.

Because:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

Statistical fluke. The universe is big. [Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.]

It is the entropy of the total system that you need to consider so while our own entropy is something of an curiosity overall the system is increasing. Think of it as throwing dice. If you throw them enough you will get a random pattern on a large scale but you'll get some strange sequences along the way.

Chekwk.... guess there are still things l turn my nose up at. God the Creator beinging of one of them. But that don't lessen my experience .... it's not black or white... believe everything or nowt.

Despite what peeps on here have said in the past

btw my question about slugs was to point out how ridiculous the religious concept of heaven is. Why aren't animals allowed?

richc - Member

Because:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

Summarise this into one sentence or you fail your exam. 😆

If the universe isn't a closed system, ie: its just really mind numbing massive but not infinite. Then unless you don't believe in Physics their must be a god, or else we don't exist.

No, nothing to do with science or god. The problem is in our maggot brains for being incapable of processing information beyond our tiny parameters.

Which is one of the reasons a lot of brilliant scientist throughout history had to change their minds about the existence of 'god', such as Faraday, Newton, Pascal and Einstein.

They support or reject?

It ain't as simple as 'I don't believe, so it can't be true', your opinion (as does mine) doesn't actually matter that much.

It ain't simple alright because our maggot brains play game with us.

😆

Statistical fluke. The universe is big. [Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.]

It is the entropy of the total system that you need to consider so while our own entropy is something of an curiosity overall the system is increasing. Think of it as throwing dice. If you throw them enough you will get a random pattern on a large scale but you'll get some strange sequences along the way.

I've never heard of Physic changing when things scale up, down to the atomic level yes, but never as things get bigger; that's one *huge* leap of faith.

That seems to be like arguing that random keys in encryption get less random the bigger they get so are less secure..........

Personally I believe in Physics, if you don't, that's upto you.

No, nothing to do with science or god. The problem is in our maggot brains for being incapable of processing information beyond our tiny parameters.

Not really chewk, Laws in Physics are proven facts or else they are theories. This is an observable repeatable event which has been verified by thousands of scientists around the world.

Unless you don't believe in the Laws of Physics?

They support or reject?

richc - Member

Unless you don't believe in the Laws of Physics?

I believe (X-file accent) 😆 But I don't just because someone says so as I know we have maggot brains.

support

In what way? I think they have given up because they cannot find the answer in life their lifetime to their research so reverted to something ... something ... 😆

I love it when someone takes a bit of physics that they clearly don't fully understand and then add "therefore God" at the end 🙂

FOG - Member
Sorry , but the concept of someone on STW having an open mind is hilarious!!

[img] [/img]

I love it when someone takes a bit of physics that they clearly don't fully understand and then add "therefore God" at the end

I don't mind that, it's "therefore religion" I have issues with. 🙂

It seems that people generally prefer an absolute.
That's why the religious are pretty unshakeable and the same goes for the atheists.

It's not an intelligent state to be in, no matter which end of the spectrum you place yourself.

The cliche that having an open mind means you'll believe anything is absurd. It just means you have sufficient confidence to have no need of an absolute position to feel secure.

Thing is with Science is the more we find out, the less we realise we know,

so to say if science can't prove it then it doesn't exist [1] is stupid as that assumes we already know everything their is to know[2], where in actual fact we know next to nothing[3].

[3] The claim we know next to nothing is overstating the case somewhat. Evolution is as true now as it will be in a billion years as will a heliocentric solar system - it is true we do know this. We also know the biblical claims re genesis are false - geocentric universe, age of universe, etc

Meh

but stop mutilating kids genitals, treating women and homosexuals as inferior beings, stop killing animals in barbaric ways

Gross and maybe even offensive generalisation...

and stop telling me I can’t exercise my right to announce that I think your stupid belief is, well, stupid.

Don't see why anyone would stop you...? You have a total right to your position.

In return you are quite welcome to call my adherence to proven facts stupid, I really don’t mind. Atheism isn't based on proven facts though - it's based on a belief in a lack of proven facts...

I don't think I would call your beliefs stupid. What's the point of doing that?

says nothing about the spaghetti monster,

Now it's crossed the line!

Elephant, that poster up there is bobbins, it fails to take into account and not limited to, evaporation cycles as well as moisture release from bodies, both breathing and when dead. Just goes to show that religion will always fail to come up with a robust answer/argument...

Elephant, that poster up there is bobbins, it fails to take into account and not limited to, evaporation cycles as well as moisture release from bodies, both breathing and when dead. Just goes to show that religion will always fail to come up with a robust answer/argument...

Gross and maybe even offensive generalisation...

Atheism isn't based on proven facts though

- it's based on a belief in a lack of proven facts...

Are you saying it is a more credible position to believe in things we have no evidence of ?
That is a limitless class of events - you are being controlled by a an invisible lizard from peru that speaks french and only ever walks backwards
Mine is a dog from wales the size of kentucky
Dont let the lack of proven facts dissuade you from this obvious truth

I don't think I would call your beliefs stupid. What's the point of doing that?

Would you respect my universe view quoted above or is it stupid?

* its alos very rude and not something i would say outside of stw so i only comment as you have in general I do have more respect than that but the view is still wrong.

Whenever I hear the live and let live line I think of this [img] [/img]

Homophobia & subjugation of woman: By default, all Jews, Muslims, & Christians.

Do you really think this?

well god does but I think we all know many [western] followers largely ignore it even if their book and leaders dont

So the comment "By default, all Jews, Muslims, & Christians" is false then ?

God doesn't just hate gays and women.

[img] [/img]

ok ernie only the good ones are the bad ones 😉

What did JC say about how gays should be treated? Or women? Just curious.

I see what you did there junkyard 🙂 tres bien.

Very little about women and nothing directly about gays that I am aware of.

Not scholarly/informed enough to fully comment to be fair

Me neither, hence asking.

Perhaps there was some much more important stuff?

A poster on here has a lovely essay on the gay issue - he is a baptist preacher iirc - and he argues that the fact that Jesus said nothing about it indicates that he deemed it unimportant and you should take his broad message of love and tolerance and say the Good Samaritan and apply this. However, unlike say an eye for an eye he never recanted it directly so its still open for debate as there is nothing of note.
A similar view is taken of women in that they are more prevalent in the Bible than elsewhere but agian there is nothing one way or the other

With very few exceptions this thread is an astonishing morass of ignorance. On both sides.

I've never heard of Physic changing when things scale up, down to the atomic level yes, but never as things get bigger; that's one *huge* leap of faith.

No it is an argument of statistics not physics. The overall tends to one outcome but within that system there are chances that individual components will go against the general trend. So while we represent a decrease in entropy as we are more ordered than a random collection of atoms in general we are statistically insignificant both in mass and time scale to the universe. We are background noise on the universe scale.

I'm intrigued about fission now. Surely building up of the heavier elements is an increase in entropy?

which are actually offensive

Offence is a very subjective subject though. You are stating that a particular point of view is offensive as a fact. It may be offensive to you but not to someone else. Some people go out of their way to be offended by anything, other people don't.

With very few exceptions this thread is an astonishing morass of ignorance. On both sides.

The main exception being what FeeFoo said above, on this page. The best post of the thread.

Would you respect my universe view quoted above or is it stupid?

Absolutely Junky. I think it's more important to respect the fact that people have and can have differing views than what the views themselves are.

joolsburger - Member
Whenever I hear the live and let live line I think of this

I don't belong to a religion and would say that tolerance is one of my key values, I can see where you are coming from.

Yes, that rings a bell junkyard. I don't recall who though.

FeeFoo - Member
It seems that people generally prefer an absolute.
That's why the religious are pretty unshakeable and the same goes for the atheists.
It's not an intelligent state to be in, no matter which end of the spectrum you place yourself.
The cliche that having an open mind means you'll believe anything is absurd. It just means you have sufficient confidence to have no need of an absolute position to feel secure.

Amen. I think that dogma and extremism are pretty valueless - no matter in what sphere.

I don't recall who though.

kja78

There is either a god or there is not a god and one is true and one is false. I am not sure why you would be that uncertain about the nature of reality.

Offence is a very subjective subject though. You are stating that a particular point of view is offensive as a fact. It may be offensive to you but not to someone else. Some people go out of their way to be offended by anything, other people don't.

I think it's more important to respect the fact that people have and can have differing views than what the views themselves are.

So, if condemning homosexuals and demeaning women [i]isn't[/i] the crux of Christianity (and does this also mean they're not all insistent that the world was created in a literal six days?), what is its main point?

I would prefer to hear the views of someone who knows what they're talking about, rather than those people who seem completely fixated on one or two subjects that the religion itself apparently doesn't seem to think are that important.

EDIT A general query, not a direct reply to the post above.

Good recall ernie!

Flounces anyway 😉

That was easier than I thought...

So, if condemning homosexuals and demeaning women isn't the crux of Christianity

There are a lot of people on here desperate for that to be the case. Sadly for them however it isn't. It's amazing how utterly fixated some people are with the homosexuality thing and a few lines in the Bible. It's like they really, really want someone from the CoE to say all gays should be burned alive. Sorry to disapoint you, but if you were to turn up at a church and say "Hi, I'm gay" you'd be welcomed with open arms. I've never met a Christian person in my life who gives two hoots what someone's sexuality is.

And if Christianity is so demeaning to women why do so many women attend church? Again, wanting something to be true because it suits your argument dosn't actually make it so.

Your prevaricating again and trying to debate me rather than the issue now. Finding the biblical view that homosexuality is an abomination punishable by death is not really searching for offence it just is offensive unless of course you think its ok to kill folk you disagree with in which case its brilliant and to be respected.

You're confusing what is written in the Bible with what the vast majority of Christian people believe. I've never met anyone who believes that homosexuality is an abomination punishable by death. I've met plenty people however who, for some reason, desperately want Christians to actually believe it.

So, if condemning homosexuals and demeaning women isn't the crux of Christianity

Yeah but the bible can be interpreted to suit your agenda, and a few words written a very long time ago in an ancient language can be taken out of context to prove your point, see 5thElefant's posts for example.

Here's the thread where kja78 explains things from his perspective :

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/anyone-read-the-bible/page/4#post-4848695

And here's some Catholics who don't appear to be 'on message' :

[url= http://www.sohomasses.com/ ]Welcome from the LGBT Catholics Westminster Pastoral Council. Our community is welcoming and open to all Catholics, with an active fellowship of many lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered Catholics, as well as their parents, families and friends.[/url]

The best post of the thread

Personally I thought gonefishin's comment about falsifiability was the most pertinent of the whole thread. But if we followed that then we couldn't have an argument which is what we're all here for isn't it?

some views are just irrational unevidenced gibberish

In your opinion. Other folk are more open minded. If you'd told an ancient Roman about the Internet he have thought you were talking gibberish.

So, if condemning homosexuals and demeaning women isn't the crux of Christianity (and does this also mean they're not all insistent that the world was created in a literal six days?), what is its main point?

You're confusing what is written in the Bible with what the vast majority of Christian people believe

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

i think the roman would ask me for proof - have they manged to get in the last 2000 years for god?

You're confusing what is written in the Bible with what the vast majority of Christian people believe.

How pick n mix can you be with religion? I seem to recall there's quite a few religious types who say you're not allowed to. Also if so many believers disagree with those nasty homophobic/sexist (amongst others, that birth control bit for eg.) sections of their chosen religion why haven't the leaders listened to their flock and officially repealed those bits?

I've never met a Christian person in my life who gives two hoots what someone's sexuality is.

Here's the thread where kja78 explains things from his perspective

His gist seems to be that we should consider what's written in context. Seems sensible.

So the leaders of all the christian denominations which don't call for the death sentence for homosexuality are wrong ? And Junkyard is right in how the bible should be interpreted ? Well that makes sense.

God it pretty clear unless you think is open to interpretation.

Seems pretty clear. But I think most christians are actually pretty nice, and they'd see the above and probably think "that's a bit of a bad thing to do, I don't think we'll bother"

It's a book that was written years ago, it's not an instruction manual for life. If people take positive things from it then that's fine by me,.

Are you asking me? I dunno 🙂 I'm still trying to work out who thinks what, I'm not answering questions!

Were you asking me whether I was asking you ? If so no, I was asking Junkyard. Although it was a rhetorical question so I wasn't really asking anyone.

Me? Yes. Someone else, I dunno? What?

I'm off to bed, my 'adorable' toddler had me up at 5 this morning to watch Horrid Henry and I'm spent.