If your ever going to watch one video,watch this one ('The Greatest Story Ever Told')

I found that point interesting too. A God that had 'evolved' would possibley be slightly more probable in that it was a biological entity of sorts, but one so advanced that it could perform God-like abilities. Shame its also essentially highly improbably when you consider how Natural selection occurs.

Even God as an extraterrestrial would maybe be more slightly more feaseable, not in the context that 'It' would fit all the nonsensical criteria we see in various holy scriptures etc, but the worship of such a being in early civilizations as a God would be totally believable and understandable in that context.


Andi

yea a god that evolved, being an ET sort of thing, but you cant really believe that since there is less evidence for ET than there is for God.

it would go against the natural order of things and also god is the one that made the natural order of things, i feel that RD doesnt believe in that sort God because for him, to always exist in the universe would make God even more complicated than an evolved one would. its just a sense im getting of him that god is too complicated to exist. he is also a guy that in feel wants to believe in God, but needs that little bit of evidence, that little clue that, hes not a "faith man", in chrisitan terms he is a Douting Thomas.

granted i thought that harris video was better, but McGarths answer to why jesus had to come to earth was also and good answer i thought.

It's not impossible since it happened, and even though we don't know exactly how it happened, one thing is for certain and that is that no supernatural element is needed for an explanation. It's also highly probable and, in a scientific sesnse, will surely be easy to understand. So however difficult it might be to explain how the universe came to be, it's a hell of a lot easier then explaining where a Creative Inteligence who existed prior to it came from. That explains nothing. Ockhams razor neatly removes the God hypothesis.

There was no universe before the big bang, not this one anyway. There may well have been countless other universes as hypothesised by M-Theory and String Theory. There may also have simply been nothing, but this universe came about from the big bang. As we know from Quantum Mechanics nothing is highly unstable and can fluctuate into something else, so the answer to the question "why is there something rather then nothing?" is that nothing is unstable. Scientists have been able to calculate that the likelyhood of something arising out of nothing is a 60-40% chance. Therefore, something is exactly what you would expect to find if there were no God.

Life didn't evolve from nothing.

I have no idea. It could be that the emergence of life was such a staggeringly unlikely event that this is the only place where it has happened. I however lean more to the side who suspects that life is teaming throughout the universe. Even if the origin of life, the emergence of that first self-replicating molecule, was a staggeringly improbable event (which I highly doubt given how quickly it arose here when it got the chance), given the amount of planets out there I doubt this is the only planet where life has taken hold. I think it would be incredibly arrogant to think we are the only intelligent lifeforms in existence, in the same way that it was incredibly arrogant of us to think we were at the centre of the universe and everything revolved around us. Really and truly what does that say about the human condition.

I imagine simple bacterial life is quite abundent, however I really doubt complex, intelligent life is that common. Natural selection is a progressive, improving force but it doesn't necessarally lead to intelligent life. We were a fluke of natural selection.

The point is I don't know, and I don't make any claims to know something I simply have no way of knowing, unlike the theists. A good argument can be made either way, unlike the God argument, but at this point in time we have absolutely no evidence that life exists anywhere else so I don't believe there is. I suspect there is and should evidence be found to prove that life exists elsewhere I'll be all to happy to believe it, if for no other reason then to see all the theists try to fit that into "God's plan".

There's plenty of good arguments to be made for the existence of extra-terrestrial life, there's no good argument that has ever been made for the existence of God let alone any evidence. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest anything supernatural exists.

No it wouldn't, it would be perfectly in keeping with the natural order because they would be natural, not supernatural.

No it didn't. You have got absolutely no evidence to suggest such lunacy.

Yes that's exactly the point. A god that has always existed, that miraculously happened into existence makes absolutely no sense and is ruled out for so many reason, let alone laws of probability.


I don't think that's true at all. He's most certainly open to the possibility that he may be wrong, as he reiterrates constantly, and that he would change his mind in an instance should evidence be found that warrants it but if you've ever read his work, particularly stuff like Unweaving The Rainbow or the last chapter in The God Delusion, you'd understandly clearly why what you said is not true.

How perceptive.

The lunacy of the religious mind. As the video that started this thread explained, Jesus almos certainly never even existed to begin with.

i disagree that it removes God, it nmight be possible, thast the god that might exist isnt the god that we worship on earth, may be a totally different one, but its not to hard to see how an intelligence at the start of the universe, creates life in this way, that it evolves, makes natural laws that they wouldnt break and instread of just creating the "I", let the "I" create itself.

i suggest you read the theorys of Arthur Peacocke, very good man,(even RD says so) hes an Biological evolutionist, and has given some very interesting ideas


yes im farmilliar with the theorys that there was many universes before ours, destroy in what is called the big crush, which in turn started the big bang, and all thiis could have happened many times! also gives the theory that the universe is still expanding from the big bang (expanding into what space id like to know) some day it will stop and then start to detract and boom the big crush, which in turn trigers another big bang and we start all over again!

but my point is that you cant have something from nothing, there has to be something there in order to start, sort of a spark before the fire, everyhting has to have a start, and usually a finish. its either that the universe is the thing that has always existed or its God, i dont believe nothing started something, dnt know if im making sense or not! lol


i believe there has to be life out there somwhere to, many even more advanced than we are! maybe not in the star wars/ dr who way but i believe it is out there. i do find it interesting that you are prepared to believe that there is life on other planets, with what it has to be said 0% evidence, yet not in god. i believe in both, but i guess the 2 are different. i believe there is life out there, and where ever there is water i think we'll find something! theres is a moom of jupitar i think that is covered in ice, i believe is a water planet, i think we'll find some big fish monster aliens there!

Well there is no evidence for either, but it's logical to assume that even though the chance of life evolving here was minute, the vastness of the universe means that even odds of a billion to one might mean a billion planets contain life.
There is, however, nothing logical about a big floating man in the sky.

yes it also suggested that the popes hat is modelled on a fishes head.

as well as saying mrishna was born on the 25th decmeber, to a virgin, was cruixified, rose form the dead, which again is simply not true, as were the other facts about the other gods, the only one with remotly similarity is the virgin birth and only in the case of horas, and that is extremly remote.

iv had a great interest in mythologyt for a long time, but the "facts" they name on the other gods was simply lies or extremely bad research

the fact is there is a lot of historical references to a real figure name jesus, i refere you to the link i posted near the start on the historical jesus

Are you suggesting that all the comparisons in the video were false? Show us evidence then.

im callling the the comparisions to the other gods false yes, its easy to fins, i posted a link near the start of the tread on mrishna, and the rest of them you can find on the wikipedia im sure, ull find the virigin birth in horas, tho not really a virigin birth in the jesus sense, but u will not find a date, the 3 kingsm, the star, his ministery at 30, i believe he was always a falcon head, and deemd a god, and to be honest i dnt even know if it was his mother who had to birth come tio think of it, i believe she was a god already.


same for attis, ull find that his mother led the penis of a god (which was cut of and turned into a fruit) on her belly which disappered and she was with child, ull not find his 12 disciples, his 25th dec birthday, him being cruxified, i even think he cut of his own penise to come to think of it

im sure its on wikipeda if u care to look, it usually is good for mythology

Depends where you look. You sure you're not looking at www.naive.com?

http://www.destee.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41935