[azzor1911]

i dont believe in god, never did.
maybe because my family is not religious, but i think it just doesnt make any sense.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by azzor1911 i dont believe in god, never did. maybe because my family is not religious, but i think it just doesnt make any sense.

I used not to either, for a time. I now realize that there is a source of creation. It makes a whole whole lot of sense actually, once you understand it.

[jonnyflashbang]

I couldn't agree more that the sooner science and religion get together, the better, after all they are both products of humans consciousness's quest to understand, explain and give meaning to itself and its surrondings.
The best telescopes in the world used to be in the Vatican.
Muslims were at the cutting edge of scientific enquiry for hundreds of years.

Like a million other people I am trying to write a book which is all about combining science & religion.


The original hebrew creation story does not define the amount of time creation occurred in.......this wasn't done until the Torah was translated..........all those fundamentalists out there who believe the Earth is 12, 000 years old!!
Can't they see that the Big Bang and creation are actually the same event.......

My book is all about consciousness.
The laws of Nature have been fixed since the big bang....human consciousness was, in the right conditions inevitable.....God is outside of time so it doesn't matter if it takes 13.7 thousand million years to get to humans......
I belive that consciousness is a string.......The image of God that humans were created in is His consciousness......creativity, imagination.....the processes which drive science but which science struggles to explain.....

Also, if consciousness is a closed loop string, M Theory states that it isn't confined to our membrane universe..........reincarnation anyone?

[Guille]

Originally Posted by Nichole I believe in God but recognize the possibility that there may not be one. I accept that. On the other hand what if there is a god. Someone who believes in God will be alright when they die. If there isn't a God then that same person will still be ok because they'll no longer exist. But if a person doesn't believe in God and there is a God there in trouble. This all assuming God is just. What do you think?

This is known as Pascal's Wager. I believe it has no sense, and should be denied, by both sides, instead of agreed, which is what is been done, by both sides. We agree with it because it appears completely self-sustained.

Because one side, should never consider the possibility of the other, as in it to be possible to happen. Of course, we do, I do, but tat's because we, humans, and our minds, are uncertain about it. The idea of god, I believe, came to earth too, but really really very too early for us to be able of managing and recognising it's magnitude. We still can't. I don't think we will do in my life time. I beleif it will happen sometime around the 24th century. Atheist shouldn't consider the possibility of going to heaven because of what atheism impplies. Theist shouldn't consider the possibility of just dying, stop existing, either as "soul" or mind, because of what theism impplies. The problem is that what atheism and theism impply is completely contradictive and paradoxical compared to what being human impplies: wondering, uncertainity, consideration of other believes...etz. So here I leave it, in a paradox, quoting a part of Wittgestein's introduction to the Tractatus:

"Here I am conscious that I have fallen far short of the possible. Simply because my powers are insufficient to cope with the task. -- May others come and do it better."