Is God poison?

[gc1765]

If there was no such thing as evolution, farmers have been wasting their time for thousands of years.

Nor would we have a problem with antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

[jefferiah]

For what purpose would elements (with no ability to think or feel anyway) organize themselves into complex beings which would care about morality and experience emotion when they could just be like the rock. And they will die anyway. ... The molecule does not decide within its state of being unable to decide to develop intelligence. Nothing shall come of nothing. Intelligence is. It preceeds. Intelligence was, is, and always will be.

The simple answer is that it is the most energetically favourable. For what purpose would elements in a tennis ball roll down a hill when they could stay at the top of the hill?

The development of consciousness is most energetically favourable? That is a big assumption there. If it were so, then why doesnt the tennis ball take the path of least resistance (as you see it) and evolve and write a novel. The tennis ball has no consciousness of its own rolling down the hill. The analogy is a bit irrelevant. The amount of energy used would not change a bit if there were no such thing as life. Mass-energy. It is a big jump to say that development of organized beings happens simply because its the easiest thing to happen. How do you know it is the easiest thing?

Matter does not need consciousness to survive. If I smash a rock, there are still two pieces. And no pain! Everything is there.

[jefferiah]

The phenomenon of adaptation and developing immunity is a far cry from becoming a whole other species, I think you will agree.

Your tennis ball analogy is a perfect example of path of least resistance. But it is a poor analogy of a living being. It is basically an analogy in my favor, and it makes the same point I am making. Whereas the non-living object just rolls down the hill, I often find myself walking up them.

Now it is possible that you may go on and say that sometimes a little hard work in the meantime saves a lot harder work in the long run. But to say that this is the reason that life happened (because it was easier) is a huge assumption, based on absolutely nothing. And actually I would venture to say it is highly unlikely since I have never ever seen an inanimate material with the ability to forego using the path of least resistance because it calculates that it will be easier in the long run. Have you? If I dig a channel to divert water from a river to flow into a dam I have created, the water will not say to itself after a while....you know its easier now to flow through this canal but then I always end up being stopped up by the dam. Water will never figure this out. No inanimate material has this property of being able to calculate what would be easier in the long run, and other than that inanimate objects dont just arrange themselves in patterns by chance. Your bedroom does not clean itself. Complex organisms and machinery don't develop themselves.

[Figleaf]

... Having to go to a Bar Mitzvah or to Church is not the worst thing in the world you know.

And yet wars have been fought over it.

[Figleaf]

The phenomenon of adaptation and developing immunity is a far cry from becoming a whole other species, I think you will agree.

No, I would completely disagree. The phenomena are closely linked. Developing slight differences between mainline and sub-species is a step in the process of species differentiation.

[jefferiah]

... Having to go to a Bar Mitzvah or to Church is not the worst thing in the world you know.

And yet wars have been fought over it.

So what? Wars have been fought over a lot of things. Someone sending there kids to a Synagogue or Church is not an act of war in itself. The war is the war, not the religion itself. You can't start banning things just because there is a possibility people could argue over it. People can argue over just about anything.

People have observed the effects gravity directly. People have observed the phenonemon of immunity directly. But no one has observed a species changing into another species. To say that it is possible that adaptations like this are small steps in such a change is a theory, and nothing more.

[Figleaf]

... Having to go to a Bar Mitzvah or to Church is not the worst thing in the world you know.

And yet wars have been fought over it.

So what?

So, while you say it's not the worst thing in the world, it must nevertheless be bad enough to engage in death, misery, and destruction to avoid it.

You can't start banning things just because there is a possibility people could argue over it.

I'm not proposing to ban religion, though it is a tempting notion. I think we'll have to settle for it just dying off from irrelevance.

But no one has observed a species changing into another species.

Are you sure?

[cybercoma]

Wars may be fought over a lot of things, but do we really need one more irrational reason? Especially a reason that disguises itself as being benign.

[jefferiah]

What do you mean one more reason? Religion has been around for a long time so it is nothing new. Futhermore, Christianity for example says things like "turn the other cheek" and "blessed are the peacemakers" and "pray for your enemies". So if anyone interprets that as a reason for war, what difference will it make if you ban religion. People who want a war will interpret anything they want as a cause for such. It would be like banning milk because 100 per cent of convicted felons drank milk as infants.

[jefferiah]

War is usually about territory and money. Greed. People who use religion to that end are just justifying. Humans do this, and they can use anyting they want. Mark David Chapman was inspired by the Catcher In The Rye to make an end of John Lennon. Is that J.D. Salinger's fault?

[gc1765]

What do you mean one more reason? Religion has been around for a long time so it is nothing new. Futhermore, Christianity for example says things like "turn the other cheek" and "blessed are the peacemakers" and "pray for your enemies". So if anyone interprets that as a reason for war, what difference will it make if you ban religion. People who want a war will interpret anything they want as a cause for such. It would be like banning milk because 100 per cent of convicted felons drank milk as infants.

It also says things like "kill anyone who worships a different God". Unfortunately, there was a time when some people put more emphasis on those verses.

[jefferiah]

What do you mean one more reason? Religion has been around for a long time so it is nothing new. Futhermore, Christianity for example says things like "turn the other cheek" and "blessed are the peacemakers" and "pray for your enemies". So if anyone interprets that as a reason for war, what difference will it make if you ban religion. People who want a war will interpret anything they want as a cause for such. It would be like banning milk because 100 per cent of convicted felons drank milk as infants.

It also says things like "kill anyone who worships a different God". Unfortunately, there was a time when some people put more emphasis on those verses.

Christianity is the New Testament. It replaces the old covenant. If it were not the case then the early apostles rather than being executed for their faith would have gone about performing forced conversions. The fact that historically there were people who did, does not make it God's fault, anymore than it was Salinger's intent that Chapman shoot Lennon.

[jefferiah]

What do you mean one more reason? Religion has been around for a long time so it is nothing new. Futhermore, Christianity for example says things like "turn the other cheek" and "blessed are the peacemakers" and "pray for your enemies". So if anyone interprets that as a reason for war, what difference will it make if you ban religion. People who want a war will interpret anything they want as a cause for such. It would be like banning milk because 100 per cent of convicted felons drank milk as infants.

It also says things like "kill anyone who worships a different God". Unfortunately, there was a time when some people put more emphasis on those verses.

Christianity is the New Testament. It replaces the old covenant. If it were not the case then the early apostles rather than being executed for their faith would have gone about performing forced conversions. The fact that historically there were people who did, does not make it God's fault, anymore than it was Salinger's intent that Chapman shoot Lennon.

You could just as easily point to people like Stalin and say that atheism is poison, and therefore we must ban it. That would be pretty ridiculous don't you think?

[gc1765]

Christianity is the New Testament. It replaces the old covenant. If it were not the case then the early apostles rather than being executed for their faith would have gone about performing forced conversions. The fact that historically there were people who did, does not make it God's fault, anymore than it was Salinger's intent that Chapman shoot Lennon.

Ok, so we can just throw out everything in the old testament?

[jefferiah]

No. The Old Testament is important. It serves as an important comparison to the New. The Old Testament teaches us about what sin is and that we are all sinners. The New teaches about mercy. But mercy does not mean that sin is no longer sin.

[gc1765]

No. The Old Testament is important. It serves as an important comparison to the New. The Old Testament teaches us about what sin is and that we are all sinners. The New teaches about mercy. But mercy does not mean that sin is no longer sin.

So, we can ignore some stuff in the old testament, but not other stuff?

How do we know what we can and can't ignore?

[jefferiah]

No. The Old Testament is important. It serves as an important comparison to the New. The Old Testament teaches us about what sin is and that we are all sinners. The New teaches about mercy. But mercy does not mean that sin is no longer sin.

So, we can ignore some stuff in the old testament, but not other stuff?

How do we know what we can and can't ignore?

I don't. But I feel strongly that laws concerning ritual cleanliness are superficial. The commandments are important. There are many punishments prescribed in the Old Testament for many sins. I probably should have been taken outside the village years ago and stoned. Who knows? But there is mercy. Mercy comes from God. Man's mercy stems from the fact that he is a sinner like everyone else. We don't let convicted felons out of jail to preside over the case of another criminal. The Old Testament teaches that we are all sinners.

Now I have readily admitted that I don't know everything about what is important or what is not? But either way, it still has no bearing on the argument. You may feel that smoking is bad, so in your house you make the rule of no smoking. Same with the church. If the church or a certain church holds to the teaching that homosexuality is a sin (and I firmly believe it is. It is mentioned as a sin in the New Testament as well, but there is no punishment in this case) then what business of that is yours? Or to put it your way, How do you know what we can and can't ignore?

[gc1765]

Or to put it your way, How do you know what we can and can't ignore?

I don't, and that's why I asked.

Anyways, the comment that started this was when I said that the old testament says you should kill people who worship a different God. Virtually everyone ignores this part nowadays, but that wasn't the case a few hundred years ago.

[jefferiah]

When Church gets out on Sunday do you feel the need to get a good hiding spot with all these poisoned violent people out on the road at once? Is it that bad really? I am sure you have family who goes to Church. Are they commiting violent crimes against you. Really, seriously. Is the general Church going public launching non-stop violent attacks against you.

[jefferiah]

Or to put it your way, How do you know what we can and can't ignore?

I don't, and that's why I asked.

Anyways, the comment that started this was when I said that the old testament says you should kill people who worship a different God. Virtually everyone ignores this part nowadays, but that wasn't the case a few hundred years ago.

Less than a few hundred years ago an atheist named Stalin purged millions of his own.

[gc1765]

When Church gets out on Sunday do you feel the need to get a good hiding spot with all these poisoned violent people out on the road at once? Is it that bad really? I am sure you have family who goes to Church. Are they commiting violent crimes against you. Really, seriously. Is the general Church going public launching non-stop violent attacks against you.

Huh? Is this directed at me?

[jefferiah]

Or to put it your way, How do you know what we can and can't ignore?

I don't, and that's why I asked.

Anyways, the comment that started this was when I said that the old testament says you should kill people who worship a different God. Virtually everyone ignores this part nowadays, but that wasn't the case a few hundred years ago.

How many Christians do you see in your neighbourhood launching attacks against atheist's? Or how many Jews do you see executing Christians?

[jefferiah]

When Church gets out on Sunday do you feel the need to get a good hiding spot with all these poisoned violent people out on the road at once? Is it that bad really? I am sure you have family who goes to Church. Are they commiting violent crimes against you. Really, seriously. Is the general Church going public launching non-stop violent attacks against you.

Huh? Is this directed at me?

Perhaps that was for Cybercoma

[gc1765]

How many Christians do you see in your neighbourhood launching attacks against atheist's? Or how many Jews do you see executing Christians?

Not very many, that's precisely why I said a few hundred years ago, when things like that did happen.

[guyser]

When Church gets out on Sunday do you feel the need to get a good hiding spot with all these poisoned violent people out on the road at once? Is it that bad really? I am sure you have family who goes to Church. Are they commiting violent crimes against you. Really, seriously. Is the general Church going public launching non-stop violent attacks against you.

I hide for sure. Wont see me out on the bike Sunday morning. Have you seen the way the churchgoers drive?

All those old ladies who dont share the road.....I stay out of the way.