Support NeoGAF

[Link648099]

It's not said directly, so it is more of an assumption. A big deal is made of God creating the Earth and creating man in his image. That's where the belief of the Earth being at the center of the universe stems from (on top of appearing completely physically evident to most people a few centuries ago) and where the assumption of being the only beings in the universe.

I agree with you mostly, except I think the whole idea about the earth being the center of the universe was carried over from the ancient Greeks, and because of the church or not, I do not know, was the prevaling viewpoint up until Galileo.

The whole idea of humans being created in the image of God is understood as more of a spiritual image, not a physical one. I guess this is how the Catholic Church can accept the validity of evolution without running into any theological problems, etc. Because while we me be decended from an ape-like ancestor, there is still something within us that seperates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. This, from a Christian perspective and most of the world's religions, is our spirit.

But before you say it is as flawed as the assumption of the heavens revolving around Earth, there's another element. Satan rebelling, man's downfall and the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus to save mankind kinda suggest that this is the first time it all happened. It reaffirms that Earth is the centerpiece of creation and, by extention, there is no other living thing elsewhere in the universe. Otherwise, if other beings going astray was fairly common, would it cause such a ruckus in the heavens every single time?

Good summary! I actually use to think this way too, but then I asked myself "What if God did choose to create other beings, in his spiritual image, but they had not fallen like we had?" I found an interesting part in scripture that could allude to this possibility.

Matthew 18:12-13
"What do you think? If a man has 100 sheep, and one of them goes astray, won't he leave the 99 on the hillside, and go and search for the stray? And if he finds it, I assure you: He rejoices over that sheep more than over the 99 that did not go astray."

If God has a 100 different creations made in his image, and one goes astray (ours), wouldnt he go to great lengths to regain that one? I guess it's something to think about. I mean, it is cetainly possible, and who is to say God, being all powerful, couldnt create other races on other planets? As I said previously, what would give God more glory? A single race in a universe that spans 14 billion light years, or an uncountable number of races that span that same distance?

Of course, you could just say that the human writers of Genesis really had limited knowledge of astronomy and they couldn't imagine all those sparkling dots in the night sky to be planets like Earth, let alone be inhabited by other beings. Either way, for something that major to be left out of the Bible, that again suggests no life is expected nor supposed to be there.

I think that is the gist of it.

Well, thats true in a way, but its good to see what the whole purpose of their writing was in the first place. The purpose was to record the revelation of God to mankind, in a way they could actually benefit from it. Having a scientific knowledge about the universe wasnt really the point of God revealing himself to man. The main idea of the first few chapters of Genesis is that God was responsible for the existence of all things. And when you look at it, the writer of Genesis got some things pretty close anyways. Such as the idea that the universe had a beginning. Compare "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" with the whole theory of the Big Bang for example.

This is a decent webpage that talks about the whole "earth is flat" argument usually tossed around as evidence against the Bible, if you are interested: http://www.tektonics.org/af/earthshape.html

 

[Link648099]

So if everything must come from something, then where did the creator come from?

I have referenced other people to posts I have made in another forum, as a previous poster pointed out, was called somehting like "Proof of God's Existence?" I talk about all this stuff in detail, starting on the third page I think. But usually, the idea of the argument goes something like this:

Everything that begins to exist must have a cause.
The universe began to exist. (as per the Big Bang Theory, and as constrained by the second law of theromdynamics)
Thus, the universe must have a cause.

Of course, if God never began to exist, then he also doesnt need to have a cause.

 

[Link648099]

Zaptruder,

A simple question:

Assumming the existence of a god, do you personally think, or can you claim to think, that this god has revealed himself to mankind at some point in time? Is it something that you, as an agnostic, think can be known?

But I will push it one step more. If this god, if he exists, wanted to reveal himself to mankind, if he chose to, would he not have been succesful in doing that, being God and all?

And if he was succesful, then wouldnt there be at least one religion out there that is true and reliably transmits what God has chosen to reveal?

I believe for the agnostic, there comes a point in time when a decision can be made by looking at the evidence, and making a decision from that. You stick to the idea that it cannot be known, but if God exists, then it is logical to believe that it can be known.

The only logical way it cannot be known, is if you are a deist or an atheist. For the deist, God has not chosen to reveal himself to mankind, and thus all religion is nothing but man's effort, and nothing more. And for the atheist, God does not exist, so the question of religion dies there.

 

[Hollywood]

Rule number one of GAF: Do not argue about religion.

I'm seeing my way out of these religious arguements. No one is going to change my view, and I'm not going to change anyone else's view. And I doubt millions of years of arguements about the creaton of life and the fundamental question in all of human history is going to be answered in an internet videogame forum thread. In the end it makes my head hurt.

Anyway ... in a vain attempt to get back slightly on topic, I've always wondered if we take that future trip to Mars and it IS biologically active, what kind of shit we could be bringing back to Earth with us. Seriously, that is a big no-no. You don't know what your messing with and you might end up bringing back a plague the likes of which human history has never seen.

 

[Link648099]

Rule number one of GAF: Do not argue about religion.

I'm seeing my way out of these religious arguements. No one is going to change my view, and I'm not going to change anyone else's view. And I doubt millions of years of arguements about the creaton of life and the fundamental question in all of human history is going to be answered in an internet videogame forum thread.

Words of wisdom there!

I'm out too. Zaptruder, or anyone else, if you want to continue this, catch me on AIM.

 

[Dilbert]

This is getting to be fucking ridiculous. Somebody made a sideways comment about religion, and inevitably that tangent consumed the thread.

Hey, I hear there might be life on Mars. Anybody want to talk about that? Or is it impossible to deal with ANY topic these days -- politics, science, education, whatever -- without having to invoke religion?

 

[MrPing1000]

This is getting to be fucking ridiculous. Somebody made a sideways comment about religion, and inevitably that tangent consumed the thread.

it made my e-penis grow mwhahahaha

 

[Zaptruder]

Zaptruder,

A simple question:

Assumming the existence of a god, do you personally think, or can you claim to think, that this god has revealed himself to mankind at some point in time? Is it something that you, as an agnostic, think can be known?

But I will push it one step more. If this god, if he exists, wanted to reveal himself to mankind, if he chose to, would he not have been succesful in doing that, being God and all?

And if he was succesful, then wouldnt there be at least one religion out there that is true and reliably transmits what God has chosen to reveal?

I believe for the agnostic, there comes a point in time when a decision can be made by looking at the evidence, and making a decision from that. You stick to the idea that it cannot be known, but if God exists, then it is logical to believe that it can be known.

The only logical way it cannot be known, is if you are a deist or an atheist. For the deist, God has not chosen to reveal himself to mankind, and thus all religion is nothing but man's effort, and nothing more. And for the atheist, God does not exist, so the question of religion dies there.

How can you guess at the intentions of a God you do not know? Who can say whether or not he laughs at us or cares for us? Or if its a he or what not?

You imply that he's made contact with us, but when I ask for the proof, by way of proof that satisfies a secular logic... a logic INDEPENDENT OF RELIGION, not to say mutually exclusive, but not reliant upon the logic of any religion... you return nothing.
To put it another way, if you can't prove it in such a fashion, then even if contact is made, which is unlikely, then that evidence can't be accepted (as it'll be ultimately circular and thus baseless proof). If we did, then it would give way to accepting many other pieces of circular logic/proof which would be attractive and plausible within the light of its own reason, but otherwise completely unfounded and unreasonable.

What kind of God would demand the kind of thinking in order to coerce his minions into believing him, that could just as easily lead them into believing a whole bunch of other tripe?

 

[Zaptruder]

Words of wisdom there!

I'm out too. Zaptruder, or anyone else, if you want to continue this, catch me on AIM.

Words of Wisdom you say; but he's essentially saying, regardless of any sound reasoning, logic or evidence provided to me, I will not change the way I think (even if I'm wrong).

This is the attitude that's endemic among people with 'faith'. Grow the fuck up I say (more directed towards society as a general now rather than link or holly).

 

[Zaptruder]

This is getting to be fucking ridiculous. Somebody made a sideways comment about religion, and inevitably that tangent consumed the thread.

Hey, I hear there might be life on Mars. Anybody want to talk about that? Or is it impossible to deal with ANY topic these days -- politics, science, education, whatever -- without having to invoke religion?

It seems to be that way... religion is a very polarizing thing... subscription to a religion demands a way of living, a way of thinking that can preclude forming your own opinion about many issues.

In this case, to recap, life is found on mars. Implies that life can form given the right circumstances without what would be outside interference... different to the idea given in Genesis.
Some anti-religion people jumped on that point,
some religious apologist came in and replied its just further proof of God.
Some other people asked, how is that proof of God?

and here we are recapping in a very brief manner.

----------

*edit* I should use the edit button... but it's not quite as easy to quote extra people in a single post.

 

[Hollywood]

Words of Wisdom you say; but he's essentially saying, regardless of any sound reasoning, logic or evidence provided to me, I will not change the way I think (even if I'm wrong).

This is the attitude that's endemic among people with 'faith'. Grow the fuck up I say (more directed towards society as a general now rather than link or holly).

The thing is there is no logic or evidence you or anyone else can provide to me. Nothing you could say would change my views on life/religion, and nothing could make it wrong.

 

[909er]

Rule number one of GAF: Do not argue about religion.

I'm seeing my way out of these religious arguements. No one is going to change my view, and I'm not going to change anyone else's view. And I doubt millions of years of arguements about the creaton of life and the fundamental question in all of human history is going to be answered in an internet videogame forum thread. In the end it makes my head hurt.

Anyway ... in a vain attempt to get back slightly on topic, I've always wondered if we take that future trip to Mars and it IS biologically active, what kind of shit we could be bringing back to Earth with us. Seriously, that is a big no-no. You don't know what your messing with and you might end up bringing back a plague the likes of which human history has never seen.

NASA already has alot of decontamination policies for anything brought back from space, or anything going out into space. But, it's possible Mars lifeforms would be harmless to us. Like how we can't get infected by viruses that affect other species, any Mars microbes wouldn't be adjusted to our biology or even the conditions of Earth, so it's doubtful they could survive.

There is a theory called Panspermia that says that life on Earth may have come from other planets, or Earth life may have been transmitted to other planets, in the early stages of the solar system when asteroid impacts were common and debris was shot into space. It'd be weird if life on Earth was actually originally Martian.

 

[teh_pwn]

Everything that begins to exist must have a cause.
The universe began to exist. (as per the Big Bang Theory, and as constrained by the second law of theromdynamics)
Thus, the universe must have a cause.

Of course, if God never began to exist, then he also doesnt need to have a cause.

Who said the universe ever began. What if it always was and always will be.

Drawing the conclusion that the universe had to begin based off our current understanding of science is faulty logic. You can't draw up concrete conclusions based of theories on that scale.

 

[Hitokage]

Of course, if God never began to exist, then he also doesnt need to have a cause.

Using the same logic, if the universe is but one in a multitude of randomly generated universes all inhabiting an unimaginably vast host space... that space won't need a cause either.

 

[sc0la]

What the hell?

How did a thread about something so SUPER COOL turn into yet another dumbass "debate" on the existence of God?

Life on Mars, people!

Spoiler

maybe

hence my disappointment in this thread.

Life on Mars, bitches!

Spoiler

proof of God not found in this spoiler

 

[teh_pwn]

Microwave background radiation pretty much killed the steady state theory.

And?

No one can make solid conclusions based off these weak theories.

 

[demon]

The thing is there is no logic or evidence you or anyone else can provide to me. Nothing you could say would change my views on life/religion, and nothing could make it wrong.

In other words, logic and evidence contrary to your views cannot change your views; your views are based on principles other than logical, rational thought. Such is the way of people like you. Like Zaptruder said..

subscription to a religion demands a way of living, a way of thinking that can preclude forming your own opinion about many issues.

As for the actual thread topic, how exciting is this, really? Obviously the possibility of some form of life on another planet is really interesting, but I'm much more interested in intelligent/sentient life beyond this planet, which I think would be an infinitely more exciting discovery having already known about simple life (like on Mars) than a discovery like this. I mean, scientifically, is a discovery like this even that surprising in the grand scheme of things?

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Can anybody tell me the point of this thread?
Yes, Mr Black Bush? I see your hand up.

MARS, BITCHES!

 

[Hollywood]

In other words, logic and evidence contrary to your views cannot change your views; your views are based on principles other than logical, rational thought. Such is the way of people like you. Like Zaptruder said..

No, you are wrong. Say there was somehoqw a foolproof way to prove God doesn't exist (which will never happen, but lets just say). My views wouldn't change any, it wouldn't make Christ's teachings any less valuable on how to live my life. I would still be the same way, nothing would be different. People like YOU seem to neglect the important aspects of the teachings. If there was no God, my guide would still be the same and I wouldn't worry a bit.