The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A creed for the 21st century > Comments

A creed for the 21st century : Comments

By Brian Holden, published 24/4/2013

Assuming that you are in the majority, then you have abandoned the religion of your childhood.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
An excellent article, and one that, as the title claims, can provide a workable basis for a thinking persons guide to living. As a long time lover of science and the advances in our understanding bought about by the application of the scientific method, I can only express agreement with the sentiments expressed. I have long found the seeming need of many people to call on ancient myths, ghosts, and all the many 'cop outs' and illogical nonsense provided by established religious belief systems to order their lives. The results of this approach are readily to be seen. We have rationality, observation and as driven by evolutionary selection, the desire to know and understand. These have lead to the universal language of mathematics and the tools of logic and method. These are all we need - indeed all that we have.
Posted by GYM-FISH, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 9:04:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is, of course, another way of looking at this.

>>That enlightenment has come at a price - as now you are unconsciously dissatisfied at being grounded in nothing larger than yourself.<<

Alternatively, you might be - consciously - aware of the enormous privilege of simply being here, given the massive odds of being somewhere else. Mr Holden gives us a succinct account of how immensely lucky we are to actually possess a consciousness at all, one that enables us to see, wonder and learn.

The history of our life on this planet should give us some idea of just how immeasurably tiny is its span. The human race really has but a few thousand years in which to communicate and discover. Living in the centre of that moment is indeed the absolute pinnacle of immense good fortune.

How can we possibly be "unconsciously dissatisfied" about that?
Posted by Pericles, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 9:29:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Brian,
An excellent article.

Life has no meaning other than the meaning you want it to have at the moment. That meaning might come from enjoying a book, whether it is a book to help expand your own knowledge, or a different book that will just enliven your own fantasies.

Your meaning at the moment may come from the resolution of your thoughts on some matter you have been mulling over for some time. That often happens to me. I suspect that for me that first arose at high school through solving problems in Euclidean Geometry, a subject that was in the syllabus to teach students how to reason. Forget the old schoolboy joke but I often slept on such problems and knew the answer next morning.

It may be that you see some purpose in helping other people either physically or mentally, the latter covering such activities as writing something for Online Opinion that might help deluded people see more clearly the universe as it really is, rather than they continue to accept some authoritarian view that was passed down to them as dogma when they were children.

Science knows for certain that evolution occurs (see the Chicago E. coli experiment). Darwin's Theory may be modified slightly over time but it has basically withstood the tests of scientists for over 150 years so is now almost a scientific law verified as extensively as the laws of gravity.

There will be responses to this article from the usual suspects.

More strength to your arm.
Posted by Foyle, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 9:38:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The human race really has but a few thousand years in which to communicate and discover. Living in the centre of that moment is indeed the absolute pinnacle of immense good fortune," says Pericles.

The human race, since its inception, has done little else but wage war and engage in killing and plundering and greed.

Assuming that one day, we really will become an intelligent species, I would prefer to be transferred to that time and leave the current chaos and slaughter behind.

Of course, with nukes, we may well not get that far and, deservedly, go the way of the dinosaurs.
Posted by David G, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 9:55:15 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Speak for yourself, Eeyore.

>>The human race, since its inception, has done little else but wage war and engage in killing and plundering and greed.<<

I can put my hand to my heart and say that I have indulged in none of these. Not one.

>>Assuming that one day, we really will become an intelligent species, I would prefer to be transferred to that time and leave the current chaos and slaughter behind.<<

Not going to happen, Marvin. The sooner you come to this realization, the sooner you will be able to enjoy your life for what it is - a staggeringly gigantic piece of good fortune that you should learn to relish, rather than despise.
Posted by Pericles, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 10:18:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Brian, you wrote, “We and the universe have no purpose. We and it are simply here.” I agree, if atheism is true you are completely correct.

It would seem to follow then that if we have no purpose then there is nothing we ought to do and equally nothing that we ought not do. What do you say then to people who choose to do things, that impact upon you, that you don’t like
Posted by JP, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 11:07:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Periclueless, because you see the world through blurred, rose-colored glasses, it doesn't mean that everyone does.

Anyway, keep on with your medication and your fantasies. One day, perhaps, you'll join the adult world and recognize and accept reality.

Cheers.
Posted by David G, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 11:12:55 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Later I learned that this planet was in existence for 4500 million years '

No wonder you live in fairy land Brian. Later you will learn that creation reveals a Creator and design requires a Designer. Don't leave it to late.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 11:45:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The universe as described by modern cosmology is just dead flying rocks. Looking out into such a cosmos, though in some sense awe-inspiring, is really terrifying.

What are the implications of the fact that our bodies are made up mostly of water? Especially if you take into consideration the work of Masaru Emoto

Water holds and grants the Power of Life. The principle of Spiritual Life has to do with the transformation of water. It involves a Process in which you free up your solid mortal asana and all of the dismal reductionism that extends from such mortal presumptions, and through which you become transformable, watery, alive, and your spirit-life begins.

The life-force is water. Emotion is water. I is H2O. I = H2O. I, meaning the sense of independent consciousness, or body-mind, equals water. Wherever water can be discovered to be, if you do comprehensive in depth consideration on it, if you enter into its molecular and atomic domain, then there is only H or Happiness.

What are the implications that all of this, including our body-mind-complex is only Conscious Feeling-Energy or Radiant Light.
And what about Consciousness IT-Self?

Has anyone ever noticed that none of the usual arguments about the nature of Reality ever use the word Consciousness with a Capital C, nor do they refer to Light which is the Energy of Consciousness.
Nor do they refer to the all-the-way-down-the-line revolutionary cultural implications of Einstein's famous equation E=MC2.

Modern quantum science tells us that everything is light, that all of reality - every person, every object, every iota of space and time - is nothing but waves in an ocean of light. But what science does not tell us is that light is not merely an impersonal force or a mass of energy. It is CONSCIOUS: it is ALIVE - in fact it is a Great Person of Light, a Radiant being of Infinite Brightness.
Even better put, in REALITY, Light Is the DIvine Person, the Great One, Living as everything, Appearing as everything, and yet, paradoxically, Always and Only Conscious Light.

http://www.dabase.org/Reality_Itself_Is_Not_In_The_Middle.ht
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 12:04:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have often wondered just what our solar system could be part of. It appears to be an atom, in a molecule, but of what.

Could it be we are part of the building materials used in a wall of a rather large entities kitchen?

Could it be we are part of a piston in a giant engine. That would at least explain our hot & cold periods.

On reflection I have decided we are actually part of a large cow pat, expelled by a very large cow, on a very very large planet, in a somewhat larger universe.

Think on it, it would explain the pile of sh#t we find in Canberra, & most world governing bodies.

Having solved your problem, it is a lovely day here in our pile of you now know what, so I'm going for a drive.

Oh, I hope you enjoy your lunch, now you know what you are eating.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 12:21:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The 'Cosmos', a Creed for the 21st Century?
Ever looking outward, ever searching for answers in the minutiae and the unreachable, the infinitesimal and the infinite?
This is the Grand Answer? Not to "Why we are here" - but we're not allowed to ask that question - and in any case it's the wrong question.
The question should be "What should we do, now that we are here?"
Appreciate the magnificence of the 'cosmos' and of our unique environment, certainly, but this is insufficient - we have to nurture, preserve, and enjoy without destroying.

>.. dissatisfied at being grounded in nothing larger than yourself.<
This identifies the failing both in this 'creed' and in mankind's use and abuse of spirituality - which has served to create division and competition both within and between 'sects', rather than reinforcing and expanding the underlying purpose of bonding 'humanity' as a whole, as one, in the cause of security and certainty for all.
'Religion' has been hijacked in its evolution by small-minded and fallible men with various ulterior motives and objectives.

>Big terrestrial problems become much smaller after your mind becomes a component of the cosmos<
Looking inwardly like this may bring momentary peace, but can change nothing.

Thought of 'God' (in so many forms) (or the hidden 'forces' of the cosmos) was purposed to bind humanity in common interest, but has failed to evolve beyond narrow boundaries, and so has not produced a set of universal 'statutes' or a common understanding for coexistence.

With a creed of common interest no-one would or could seek to dominate or to amass wealth for selfish purpose; and the lowest would not be alone.
"Easter Island' looms, as we seek the wrong answers in the wrong places (and continue to misuse 'God').
Posted by Saltpetre, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 1:13:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Humanity needs to be reassociated with Reality Itself, Truth Itself, Real God. Even in order to support ordinary human life, humanity needs access to the esoteric Truth of existence and the real experience of that Truth.

There must be a resurrection of Consciousness in the 21st century - just as there was a "death" of Consciousness in the 20th. For the sake of humanity, there needs to be a commitment to do this - now, and forever hereafter. Otherwise, people are left with the common dismal exoteric point of view.

Nowadays, there are only sentimental nostalgic gestures towards the ancient esoteric understanding that Consciousness transcends physical existence. The characteristic attitude today is that such beliefs were merely primitive. But, as far as the world-culture is concerned, it is just not going to work anymore to base human life on merely mortal principles. The language and experience of science or mere exoteric religion is not sufficient.Both are bogged down in reductionist materialist presumptions.

Humankind at the end of the 20th century has killed its Deity, in every form that the Deity has been conceived. What is required is Real access to Reality. A New Reformation.

http://www.beezone.com/AdiDa/ScientificProof/chap_1_the_new_reformation.html

http://spiralledlight.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/4068

The Ancient Reality Teachings on Consciousness (also published as Reality Is All the God There Is)

http://global.adidam.org/books/ancient-teachings.html
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 2:07:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"That enlightenment has come at a price - as now you are unconsciously dissatisfied at being grounded in nothing larger than yourself"

What about people ,like myself, who are perfectly happy in this state ?
Posted by Aspley, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 2:23:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Many people who comment on articles, such as this one, understand almost nothing about the science of the universe we live in.

To some, its all rocks, to others it is all light. Actually most of the universe is hydrogen.

Over 100 years ago Einstein showed that light and matter are interchangeable. His relativity concepts have been tested by brilliant scientists thousands of times and have passed every test.

Our sun, through thermonuclear fusion, converts about one million tonnes of mass per second into energy, a smallish part of which is seen by us as light. I have forgotten the energy distribution over the whole radiation spectrum. Progressively that fusion process convert hydrogen into heavier elements up to about iron, the 56th (in atomic number) of the 92 natural elements.

The elements above iron are produced when a sun comes to the end of its life in a supernova explosion. That is how the uranium and gold etc in the earth came to be. Our earth contains debris from an earlier sun (or two?).

Runner persists with his fantasy that evolution doesn't occur; that man is the prime creation of his invisible friend. As I have said several times before, read Robert Ardrey to see how we came so late on the scene, three billion years or so after the first known life forms. Or read the about the Chicago University E. coli evolution experiment which showed how selection could change the actual size of the E. coli and how two mutations over 30,000 generations could alter the food absorption system to make something initially indigestible (citrate) into an adequate food.

Thanks again Brian for your excellent effort.
Posted by Foyle, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 5:51:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In response to the author's comment: “We and the universe have no purpose. We and it are simply here”, JP concluded "then there is nothing we ought to do and equally nothing that we ought not do. What do you say then to people who choose to do things that impact upon you that you don’t like."

JP's fear that there is "nothing we ought to do and equally nothing that we ought not do " makes sense only if you assume a second, unwarranted premiss, namely that what we do here will affect our comfort levels when we enter the stage after the "here" stage. In other words, an after-life.

If you ignore this unsustainable assumption, the answer to JP's question could go something like this.

"Mate, there is no after. You and we are only here for the now. This experience that we are so lucky to have, given the incredible odds against anybody's having it, is the only experience that we will ever have. We are all in the same boat so if we are to maximise the probability that all of us will have the best "here" experience, we must all behave so that nothing we do detracts from others' experience. So, mate, we would all very much prefer that you stop doing things that lessen our (and your) chance of enjoying this one opportunity we have of being a sentient creature."

You might detect a suggestion of the golden rule: do unto others …. Quite so. But notice that there is no need to imagine a god or some other unfeasible superior, authoritative mental construct to derive it?

Thanks Brian for a (much) better than average article.
Posted by GlenC, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 6:51:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In my recent post, I wrote, "So, mate, we would all very much prefer that you stop being a d--- head and cease doing things that lessen our (and your) chance of enjoying this one opportunity we have of being a sentient creature." I used the actual letters that now appear here as dashes.

The software immediately instructed me to remove the profanity. My understanding of profanity is clearly out of date!
Posted by GlenC, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 7:00:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
GlenC – Obviously there are plenty of people who couldn’t care less about maximising “the probability that all of us will have the best "here" experience”. They have the attitude of wanting to maximise their own pleasure and if that comes at the expense of others, too bad for the others.

The fact is that in an atheistic universe no one has any responsibility to anyone else regarding anything. You may choose to act thoughtfully and generously to others but there is no obligation on any one to do the same for you. Indeed if they want to rob you blind, and they can get away with it, there is no reason why they shouldn’t.

So, I ask again, “What do you say to people who choose to do things, that impact upon you, that you don’t like?”
Posted by JP, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 9:10:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JP
You need to read Phil Zuckerman's book, "Society without God" written after a year in Denmark and Sweden studying the societies. He concluded that both societies were irreligious and innately good.

A German study of OECD social justice was covered by an article in the NY Times on 28 Nov 2011. That study shows that the least religious countries have the best social justice systems. The first six places were filled by Iceland, Norway Sweden, Denmark, Finland and The Netherlands. The study and article are available at;

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/29/opinion/blow-americas-exploding-pipe-dream.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212
http://www.sgi-network.org/pdf/SGI11_Social_Justice_OECD.pdf

You do not know what you are talking about. I'm an atheist and every year I spend all I can afford helping students who are not among my large brood of grandchildren.
Posted by Foyle, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 10:17:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting facts, Brian, but facts no values produce.

Experiencing the divine can occur while watching the sunset on the beach, or the stars, or while trying to solve a problem in geometry. But then it can also occur while looking for your lost keys.

The problem about it is that people who had a glimpse of the divine, tend to attribute it to their immediately-prior activity, thus you may have a creed of sunset-watchers, a creed of star-watchers, a creed of geometry-solvers and a creed of lost-key-searchers, all competing and fanatically insisting that theirs is the only way.

Dear Foyle,

While there are societies that have no concept of God, that does not make them in fact a "Society without God".

Atheists can be as religious as anyone else.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 25 April 2013 1:05:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu,
you wrote, "While there are societies that have no concept of God, that does not make them in fact a "Society without God".
Atheists can be as religious as anyone else."

You need to have some idea of what a religion is. Religion is usually considered to be belief that a supernatural being exists or that there is something in addition to the natural world.

If people accept, as I do, that only the natural world exists those people cannot be considered religious.

I accept that when my brain dies that is the end of me. All I can hope to do is leave behind some offspring and some worthwhile changes I have helped introduce
Posted by Foyle, Thursday, 25 April 2013 7:07:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Foyle,

<<Religion is usually considered to be belief that a supernatural being exists or that there is something in addition to the natural world.>>

Yes, this is often how religion is superficially considered, mistaking just one possible religious technique for the whole of religion. For many people, perhaps even for most and for most of their religious journey, believing in something outside the natural world is useful because it helps to loosen their attachment to the natural world. Nevertheless, it is only a technique and some religions do not even use it.

<<If people accept, as I do, that only the natural world exists those people cannot be considered religious.>>

Wouldn't you agree that many who do accept that things exist outside the natural world are irreligious, even if they go to church (take paedophile priests as an example)? Judging to what extent one is religious or otherwise is very difficult - one must consider their whole life, whether in fact they lead a life that brings them closer to God, not just what they happen to mentally believe in or not.

<<I accept that when my brain dies that is the end of me.>>

This sentence is self-contradictory:

WHO accepts that?

The brain? well surely when the brain dies it will be the brain's end, that's a tautology, but you just wrote "when MY brain dies" - WHOSE brain?
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 25 April 2013 10:36:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foyle – I don’t know why you just don’t answer the question, “What do you say to people who choose to do things, that impact upon you, that you don’t like?”

I would be very surprised if there are no jails in Iceland, Norway Sweden, Denmark, Finland and The Netherlands. But if there is no purpose to our existence, as Brian correctly asserts, in an atheistic universe, then whatever one person chooses to do is just as “good” or “bad” as what any other person does. Locking people up for doing certain things is just an exercise of raw power by those who are able to get away with it.

You say that you want to leave behind “some worthwhile changes I have helped introduce”. In a purposeless universe, the notion of “worthwhile changes” is completely incoherent. Change can only be meaningful if there is some objective goal that can be aimed for, but such a goal is clearly absent in a purposeless universe.

Of course if you are referring to your own subjective purposes that you simply happen to have made up, you can consider changes you make in that direction to be “worthwhile”. But equally you would have to concede that the changes that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc, made to try and achieve their own subjective goals were equally as “worthwhile” for them. But would you really want to do that?
Posted by JP, Thursday, 25 April 2013 11:03:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JP,

You've had your arguments on this topic (your only topic, apparently - I can only imagine how deep and complex your theology must be) discredited many, many times. But in true Christian fashion, you simply come back, repeat the same discredited nonsense, and somehow think that's okay.

I explained the absurdity of your position here at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=13321#230298

Let's grant that a god (your god, even) exists. So what? Why should I do what they say just because they say it? That's like a parent saying, "Because I said so." That's not a reason. Not as much of a reason as, "Because my actions have consequences and I have to live and get along with those around me", at least.

Anyway, it's as I've said to you once before, if you can't see why immoral and criminal acts are bad without a god to tell you that they are, then you have sacrificed your humanity in deference to your god.

I suggest you keep your beliefs. You'd obviously be a danger to society without them; I'm sure you'd agree. Apparently you're incapable of living a civil, law-abiding life like most atheists, and a proportionately smaller percentage of theists, are.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 25 April 2013 8:31:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A great point, AJ Philips:

<<Let's grant that a god (your god, even) exists. So what?>>

Excellent observation! Just above I wrote: "Interesting facts, Brian, but facts no values produce". In other words, existence is meaningless as it cannot form a basis for values, for love, for truth, for religion, for goodness - not even the existence of god.

<<Why should I do what they say just because they say it?>>

Indeed, God never said anything, but wise sages who knew God observed that "the kingdom of God is justice and peace and joy in the holy spirit": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL1_IhVTJmk

Now obviously there is no such place in existence that is "the kingdom of God" - what this statement means is that when one subjects him/herself to God and crown Him as one's king (willingly and lovingly, not because one 'should'), then one finds justice, peace, joy and much more.

Now it would be silly to suggest that people who do not believe in God cannot have values and even excellent values. One can crown God as one's king even unconsciously with no reference to any concepts and ideas. A concept of God may help, but is not strictly necessary.

You have such values yourself, which you seem to take for granted even if you mistakenly believe that they come from humanity. I would say that this is a technical error, that these values come from subjecting yourself to God, at least to some degree - but who cares: so long as you do have those values of goodness, however you rationalise them - then whether you believe so or not, you have at least a foot in God's kingdom.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 25 April 2013 10:44:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>>Change can only be meaningful if there is some objective goal that can be aimed for, but such a goal is clearly absent in a purposeless universe.<<

I'm not an atheist and I know what the meaning of life, the universe and everything is: 42.

So if the 'objective goal that can be aimed for' it raises the question 42 what? The Answer doesn't come with units so there's obviously something wrong with your question JP.

Cheers,

Tony
Posted by Tony Lavis, Thursday, 25 April 2013 11:22:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An interesting article and a proactive approach to promoting an open discourse and discussion on a very difficult subject. A good start Brian!

I tend to rely on pure mathematics to explain most things.

Unlike Runner who is certifiably deluded or pre-indoctrinated to a religious bent, pure maths will explain so much that your mind will be encapsulated in the law of physics and the true realisation our fortunate luck, vis existence, on this tiny iota of molten rock in a cosmos of confusion, remains contra to the on-going struggle religion and other ‘concocted mantras’; articulate our existence in a quasi-moral or semi-qualitative scientific manner.

A great article and a great primer for further discourse, well done good Sir.

If you have a real problem or quandary with explaining things, perhaps you should look to the Mandelbrot Set and its co-related Julia set.

No simple answers, but explaining this conundrum really would take more than OLO has the capacity to handle.
Posted by Geoff of Perth, Friday, 26 April 2013 12:08:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
But who is to say any creed is right? The atheist assumes there is no god, the Christian says there is a God. The cosmologist leads an essentially existential life, the Christian leads a life with a purpose well beyond his or her own existence. Enlghtenment folk tend to talk a lot, but it's a bit hard to see what they are driving at as they claim there is no ultimate purpose higher than what we now see and do.
If there is a God, then He must be holy; He must be separate to what we see and do existentially as He would have had to create it (otherwise He couldn't be God). If He is holy then He wouldn't be able to countenance or commit what is wrong; therefore, there must be a category of right and wrong in the universe. What to do about what is wrong then? The Christian understanding is that God sent His Son, Jesus Christ into the world as a time-space, existential God-man to not only lead a perfect life, but to sacrifice His own life in order to atone for what is wrong in the world (categorised as sin). Christ alone was able to suffer at the hands of sinful men the death of the cross in order to expiate this sin of man - even the sin of killing Him on the cross. Unlike anyone else, Christ was sinless, he could not stay dead -death is the ultimate penalty for what is wrong (ie sin). Christ had to rise from the dead; that resurrection is the key to cosmology as described in this piece. There indeed is far more to life than what we experience day to day; real cosmology points to the Creator / saviour and speaks volumes as to the reality that there is a deeper meaning to life. Check it out for yourself in the Bible.
Posted by TAC, Friday, 3 May 2013 11:42:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy