But then worshipping such a god would have no meaning or purpose and every religion thus far would be false. This is the deist attitude btw, one that holds to god(s) being irrelevant and/or absent.
Food for thought: "How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant'? Instead they say,'No, no, no! My god is a little god and I want him to stay that way.' A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the Universe as revealed by modern science might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths." Carl Sagan Pale Blue Dot On Feb 23, 9:02 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > I am largley unconcered about that one Fidds. > > I would expect a God who grants free will, and takes no action towards > the happening on this planet (as is my belife) to let us discover > these sorts of things in our own time. > > On 23 Feb, 16:01, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You have hit on the exact problem of religion in general. It never > > transcends the culture it is invented in. In these "divine" > > occurrences there is never any medical knowledge beyond what is > > already known, no technology, and linguistically identical to the > > culture and often regarded as the only "true" language that it must be > > read in, etc.. > > The values of the god in question are also shockingly similar to the > > prophets involved. A small band of unhappy Canaanites invented a god > > that allowed them to conquer their region and put nearly everyone to > > the sword as well as justifying the kidnap and rape of any women they > > want. A gold-digging, illiterate teamster invented a god that allowed > > him power and prestige, as well as pre-pubescent girls. > > > Sadly, none of these people can invent gods that impart previously > > unknown ideas. Can you imagine if a god did exist, and told people in > > a book how to treat an infection? The dark ages might well have been > > averted in Europe if not for the christians insisting that demons were > > responsible for sickness (and elves, witches, neighbours, pagans, > > atheists, cats, trees, etc.). Or the advances that we might have > > enjoyed technologically if religions didn't burn the books of those > > that came before them and murder anyone that bucks the servility > > concept in order to invent or discover? Or how united the world would > > be if a god's words could be read by anyone and every language and > > people were accorded equal weight and respect? > > > Instead, every religion is filled with the ignorant mutterings of > > whomever invents them. Some even take a step backward when knowledge > > available elsewhere is unknown to the "prophet" and so dismissed when > > encountered. > > > On Feb 23, 3:19 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > So you Atheists can of course get involded in this one, I really don't > > > know why you should or what the interest for you would be, but do feel > > > free. > > > > I was thinking the other day about religion and culture. I'm somewhat > > > worried about how to seperate the message of God from that of man. > > > > So it suddenly struck me that any message that truely comes from God > > > must trancend culture. > > > > Thoughts?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
