If there is no God. Then someone explain life.

[Mike Cl]

For me, it involved acting pious, trying to concentrate on the sermon, a good deal of fidgeting, and self reprisal for constantly letting my mind wander.  I would pull my mind back to the activity and feel like I was doing it right again, but all of a sudden I would be thinking about playing touch football or something with my friends, but I was never aware of drifting from my duty into my independent reverie.  I would suddenly just find myself off topic and wonder how long I had been off topic.  I never managed to make contact with the unseen spirit world that everyone told me was out there.  I  wondered a lot about if it might be fake during the worshipping process.  I never actually felt a feeling of worshipping, and what such a feeling would be like, I couldn't say.  It was more like I was following along and doing the alternate readings in the service, and singing these songs.  People around me would be singing, but unless it was a Christmas carol, I was never familiar with the melody, so I would read the words in the hymnal and make my voice go higher and lower, but not too loud so that no one would know I didn't know the tune.

That sounds like me in regular church from as far back as I can remember.  When in my spiritual mode, I would try to apply whatever lesson to myself and to not be judgmental or to be more giving--that sort of stuff.  I have just never gotten in touch with the 'worship' concept.   

[trdsf]

I have the same reaction to 'numinous' as I do to 'spiritual', and it's not a positive one.

I prefer just plain old non-spiritualized awe.  I am awestruck when I look through a telescope, and empowered because I know why that star is blue while that one is red.  I am awestruck contemplating the layers of infinity of the integers and reals, and empowered when I stumble on my own on a proof of a particular number theorem -- even if it's not original, I know I found it on my own.

'Numinous' smacks a bit too much of religiosity for me.  The concept finds its origins in a theologian and its popularization in C.S. Lewis, who may as well have been one; despite its later use by Sagan and Hitchens, it goes too far for me.  I already know the universe and physical reality is greater than myself -- that doesn't mean it has a spiritual nature besides.  That strikes a little too close to the Gaia "hypothesis" for comfort -- Galaxia, or even Universalia.

No, reality is quite enough for me.  Reality, and the utterly improbable fact that I happen to be a product of it that can -- within limits -- understand it.

[SGOS]

Theists think about things all the time.  They wonder why Jesus loves them so much.  They think about how great it is that God is perfect.  They think about how god sends flooding to punish all of us for gay marriage, but it's just coastal flooding.  So gay marriage is not as bad as whatever those people were doing during Noah's time.  They think about kangaroos.  What a unique animal God decided to create.  Kangaroos prove there must be a god.

[Mr.Obvious]

  They think about kangaroos.  What a unique animal God decided to create.  Kangaroos prove there must be a god.

And the platypus proves he has a sense of humor.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And the platypus proves he has a sense of humor.

Or he's actually a committee.

[Baruch]

And the platypus proves he has a sense of humor.

IF G-d wanted women to carry purses he would have provided them with a built in pouch like the kangaroo ;-)

[Mr.Obvious]

Or he's actually a committee.

That's Good. I have to remember that one.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

That's Good. I have to remember that one.

"Committee will break into sub committees. Subs will be remembered as the things that sunk ships in both world wars.  This is a strong indicator of the success expected by the committee."

[Cavebear]

Is the original question still open?  If so the simple answer is dumb stupid chemistry.  How?  The same way dust bunnies are created under you bed.

[SGOS]

These things are always open.  When I first got here, reopening a conversation would often get a curt reply, "How come you bumped an old thread?"  But it was usually because somebody didn't like what you said.  For some reason, people don't seem to get their nose out of joint from that anymore.  So you're OK, I think.

[Baruch]

i bumped a few old threads when I first got here ... just because I was curious.  If you are a regular, you know what threads are hot and what are not.

[alexxmedeiros]

Yep--no higher power, no lower power, no middle power.  There are no gods; never were and never will be.  Your god is simply a fiction.  If not, maybe you could supply us with a few facts?

Explain life?  Read about evolution to get a good start.  And just because one does not know how something works does not make 'god did it' legitimate--just lazy.  Good luck in your quest for god and facts fitting together in any way.

Are you absolutely certain that it is impossible for the Christian God to exist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baruch]

Alex ... what does it mean to exist?  Philosophers have debated that for 2500 years ... do you finally have THE answer? ;-)

[Mr.Obvious]

Are you absolutely certain that it is impossible for the Christian God to exist?

THE christian God? As if there is only one?

Him being three people at once aside, there are as many Christian Gods as there are Christians.

[Blackleaf]

Are you absolutely certain that it is impossible for the Christian God to exist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you absolutely certain that it is impossible that the Earth is actually flat?