Thread: Is it possible for us as men to have a discussion on God

Originally Posted by syslight

...Of course one need to remember, the human being is not the highest form of life on the planet, he is the lowest. Like it or not the most important importantlife form on the planet is the most prevelant, to whit, BACTERIA. We are all simply tools that the bacteria which lives in us uses to propagate it's species and provide it with shelter and sustanance. Without bacteria we would be dead, without us many types of bacteria would die. We look for the outer god(s) but never consider the inner one, which a few hundred years ago science failed to believe in the existance of bacteria.

What an incredible coincidence. I have been telling folks for years that human beings are the cruise ships of the microbiological world. They probably created us, just as we created cruise ships. We're relative newcomers on this dirt ball compared to their history here.

Some of them sacrificed themselves as smallish powerplants: mitochondria. Some are purely symbiotic, but some of them specialized to perform as collectives in various functions, skin vs. muscle vs. neural, or were engineered so by the Big Kahuna bacteria, the stem cells or who ever came before them, probably from Mars or a comet from somewhere else.

Think about it, the fungi were the first to use chemical warfare (penicillin) to try and check the aggressive feeding of the bacteria. No matter how you cut it, it's a form of organic engineering. They tried lots of different models over the years and we're just the latest so far. Until the next planet killer comes along.

They allow us to have thoughts about God and arguments like this to distract us from figuring out it was really them. If it wasn't for bacteria, we'd be so deep in sh*t. They even clean up after us. Amazing.

I'm as near enlightenment as I have been in years for those thoughts and I think I'm getting a fever...

Hey Mike, I have 2 little kids. It's like I am constantly surrounded by petri dishes on little feet, giving me hugs, kisses and a significant amoutn of germs, viri and bacteria.

As for us being the supreme beings... from my point of view this is the truth of course, but realistically I'd give that honor to the roaches. They can survive anything and everything, in even the most hostile environments imaginable.

wow, this thread got resurrected from before i was even a member... you musta been pretty bored to dig this one up, hog.

to answer the original question:

if people want to call the innate laws of existence "god" and pretend that this entity is a) interventionist and b) interested in them personally... well, it seems silly to me, but whatever floats your boat. personally, i have no use for it.

but, as i was saying in another thread a while back, nearly 100% of human misery stems from the concept illustrated by the following exchange:

person x: i believe idea a.
person y: i believe idea b.
person x: sure, cool, whatever makes you happy.
person y: i will not stop trying to convert you until one of us is dead or you capitulate.

so, even though i don't think there's a Heston-esque figure in the sky, i don't care if others do. as long as they have the decency to keep it in a church. the very minute they find out i don't believe as they do and start trying to convert me, i'm no longer ok with their belief system.

Ha!

The microbes rule all!

Do they have commandments? Are we morally bound to protect our fellow cruise ships?

Originally Posted by Russel Baldridge

Ha!

The microbes rule all!

Do they have commandments? Are we morally bound to protect our fellow cruise ships?

Nah, it's the biological verson of the Matrix. We're allowed to think those things by the corporate trillion little buggers who inhabit each one of us.

Originally Posted by jockeys

wow, this thread got resurrected from before i was even a member... you musta been pretty bored to dig this one up, hog.

I thought a resurrection might get your attention

Anybody still interested in the morrality question that's been tossed back and forth a few times?

It seems that with a split like 56% believing in "God" and 44% disbelieving, and in accordance with the fact (hopefully) that none of us are mass murders or sociopathic degenerates, that morality can indeed come from within us. No?

It's a question I've asked many times, and I seem to come to a similar conclusion each time, morality is an extension of our ability to reason and assess our world with an action vs. reaction mindset.

Sanctity of human life? We respect each other's lives because (as rational, intelligent beings) we can deduce that being killed would be unpleasant (not to mention very frightening). So, since we can predict that we don't want to die, we refrain from imposing that on another person.

Answering to the authority of others when we have no "supreme" arbiter? Same scenario, it's a mutual congeniality, with the extra dimension that we can sense when another person has a better grip on some subject than we do as individuals, at which point it's in our interest to differ certain powers to that person.

Indulging in worldly desires? Any rational person can determine when some action or vice is infringing on other people in a way we wouldn't wish on ourselves, same argument for respecting life.

This idea of rationality and intelligence ought to be given more credence in subjects like this, to say that a person looses his morality when he disavows a religious belief is to say that he loses his ability to function as an intelligent human being (which I think has been refuted by the eloquence of all of the contributors to this thread regardless of their beliefs ).

(correction: percentage is changing, 54% believing, 46% disbelieving)

I believe and understand what I have seen and experienced for myself. I take people as I find them and judge them by how they live their lives. I don't find that much else actually matters to me.

I don't believe in what academics, governments, television or religions tell me I should believe in. I'm afraid that too many times I have found that truth gets in the way of propaganda and what I have seen with my own eyes does not conform with what perceived authority may wish me to believe. I also find the indoctrination I received in my formative years tends to be more of a hindrance in life than a help.

I have not in my life seen any evidence that there is a God other than others strong belief. I understand that many people need to have this belief but I really don't have that need. I also can not get exercised if others feel they need their beliefs just so long as they don't force their beliefs on me. Only then do I feel angry with their arrogance. I do not seek to impose my way of thinking on others. It's a free world and we can all think what we like. Just don't impose your thoughts on others.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I thought a resurrection might get your attention

mea culpa.

russel-> I think you bring up an important point here. totally apart from interventionist deities and "special revelation" i think that the one rule that has held society together thus far has most famously been summed up as:

"as long as thou harmest no one, do as thou wilt."

it's when people start trying to impose their ideas of harm, as well as arbitrary morality of a non-functional nature, that the trouble begins.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

I thought a resurrection might get your attention

It'd get anyone's attention
It supposedly happened 2000 years ago, and people are still talking about it.
Although many of what we today call miracles are probably mistranslations. I've read that the 'walking on water' myth has snuck in over the centuries. The earlier (more original) texts describe it as 'standing above water' or 'Being in a location over water' or something. In the context of those words, the more likely explanation is that he was standing somewhere on a rock / bridge / overhang.

But I've also heard that argument refuted by the claim that the King James bible was divinely inspired when it was composed. So no matter what the original texts and earlier translations say, the KJ bible is the absolute truth because God guided the people who wrote it...

Which is of course another way to end debate I guess.