Caliann the Elf <calianng_graves at yahoo.com> writes: > Upon reflection of this thread, I find myself personally offended by > the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal creator that, for > some odd, divine reason, suffers from severe insecurity and low > self-esteem in that He constantly needs the praises of His creations > to know that He is "good". Me too. But if he's real, we have to deal with it. Luckily, a complete absence of the slightest trace of evidence even *suggesting* that he's real leaves me free not to worry about it much. [snip] > Mathmaticians and physicists can mathamatically trace the the > expansion of the cosmos back to the "Big Bang". The difficulty > there is when they get to Time = 0. At that point, something, > someone or some force outside our laws of physics had to make the > first push. In other words, something outside of our cosmos had to > start the ball rolling. (The previous paragraph is based on > discussions I had some years ago with a group of mathmatics > professors. New information MAY have come to light since then. If > so, please politely inform me of it and don't jump down my throat, > okay?) We still can't go back beyond the beginning of the observable universe. Thing is, I don't find postulating a (non-disprovable) "first cause" to help *any*. Because the question of where *it* came >from is at least as pressing as where the universe came from was before. And *much* more troubling, especially if your first cause is a self-aware entity (where the heck did one of those come from, so early?). > Psychologically, most humans have a hardwired need for some form of > religion and/or spirituality. (If you are interested in the specific > studies on this, e-mail me off list and I'll send you the full > bibliography) This need that is shared by most of humanity begs the > evolutionary question: What racial survival necessity was/is filled > by religion/spirituality? Evolutionary fallacy; all that's necessary is that it didn't *hurt* survival too much. And it may be totally a side-effect of something else, for that matter. I tend to distrust scholarship in this area -- it's so politcally dangerous to find anything except pro-religion results. And the findings are totally contrary to all my personal experience. > Some have said that religion itself is shrinking. I have to > disagree. I concede that membership of the MAJOR religions is > shrinking, but that is in favor of smaller, gentler belief > systems. Christianity, Islam and Judaism are shrinking exponentially > as people turn to Buddhism, Paganism and Kabbalism. Mysticism and > meditative religions are growing while the rigid, older systems are > loosing their followers. This is NOT a new thing, as it has been > repeated throughout history in different cultures. That's very much a *local* phenomena; talk to people from Europe (including the UK). > I do not think that religion itself is what most people object > to....I think it is the religions that they feel are forced upon > them. Most of the people I speak with do not object to the idea of > God (or Goddess), they object to the idea of Hell...or worse, of > Heavan where one spends eternity singing "Hosanna" over and over > again. ( Okay, someone remind me, WHICH place am I supposed to be > aspiring to? The eternity of screams and Hellfire....or the > eternity of musical boredom?) Maybe. I object strenuously to the whole concept of religion, spirituality, etc. It's superstitious nonsense, and hurts people, and destroys great civilizations. -- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b at dd-b.net / http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ John Dyer-Bennet 1915-2002 Memorial Site http://john.dyer-bennet.net Dragaera mailing lists, see http://dragaera.info