At alien 01:00 PM on Oct 8, alien wrote:

Posted by: alien

"Wow.. such fragile morality..
You REQUIRE a God to feel compassion, or to practice respect? Is this because you fear HELLFIRE?"

What kind of monster are you, inside, that you must be compelled so, by ancient tales, to act like a reasonable human being?

I don't get it. I don't believe in God, nor Santa Clause, nor do I think Jesus walked-on-water or was Raised from the Dead. I don't need ANY of that to love my kids or my wife, or to treat others with respect.

We MAKE the RIGHT that is in the world.. This is a liberating philosophy. God didn't CREATE America.. ENLIGHTENED folk of that time drafted it out of a collective vision, with wisdom and intelligence and compromise, and many across the world were inspired by this.

>
> No God = No reason for me to respect you, your
> life, or anything that is not immediately
> beneficial to me. Or is that what you were actualy
> going for?

I respond as follows:

I must say that I was surprised at how appalled you appear to be at this statement.
Your rage and indignation is palpable. I find myself wondering why my humble observation is so threatening to you.

Please consider the complete context of my original reply to No Man In The sky:

>Saw the movie this weekend-it's hilarious and
> reaffirms the many of the great wars stemmed from
> religious ideology. Bill does not judge or make
> fun of the many believers in this film; instead,
> they embarass themselves.

My response was:

“If there is nothing higher than ourselves, no moral template, then there is nothing wrong with war, murder, rape, theft, etc.. at all!”

”You are left with your personal whims as the ultimate law. If mine are bad for you - who cares.

”No God = No reason for me to respect you, your life, or anything that is not immediately beneficial to me. Or is that what you were actualy going for?”

My point is that there is no particular reason to view war, or any other incursion, as immoral if we, as a species, are simply making up the rules as we go along. If there is no creator, then we are left as the ultimate authority and may be as subjective as we wish in our authorship of “right and wrong.” The only judicial factor is who has the most power, support, or control.

When I saw the post from No Man In The sky, I found myself annoyed by what I read as yet another itteration of the ancient argument “More have died in the name of God ……” argument. Almost invariably, this leads to some form of the sophomoric conclusion that belief in God leads to murder, rape and pillage. You may as well say that agriculture ultimately leads to famine, riot, and barbarism. Should we abandon our crops if they can be misused? Should we abandon language if it can be used to lie? Should we abandon any form of government if some forms are oppressive? Is an idea or belief to be rejected if it can be warped or twisted?

None can deny that religion has been USED to wage war, but to say that religion CAUSES war is a bit asinine. In the end, wars are ultimately fought over some form of “You have it – and I want it” or “I have it – and you are trying to take it.” If you wish, you can paint the shell with religion or ideology, but inside there is still the nut that embodies “give it to me” and “I must keep it.” By the same token, I cannot think of any personal crime or assault that does not finally reduce to this.

Please consider that every organism on the planet, as either an individual or part of a collective, is driven by the same basic principles of acquisition and retention. If there is no creator, then we need no further justification or basis for our laws. Every animal on the planet obeys these laws, and you and I will be just another two animals. The affection that we feel for our mates, offspring, and tribe would simply be an instinct that promotes our continued personal existence and / or the continuation of a line.

I, for one, believe that you and I are not just another two animals on the planet.
(Please note that I do not insist that you share this belief.)

I believe that I have been given free will, and thus liberty from my instincts and the opportunity to grow beyond them.

I believe that God has created us, and that to “create” is the ultimate and most positive manifestation of the verb “Choose.” Thus, God has already “chosen” us. What remains is for us to choose God. Since only the most counterfeit form of association can be gained though intimidation, it is necessary for us to choose God via “faith.”

What could be more intimidating than direct and unambiguous proof of a divine being? It would certainly cause one to fall back upon the basic survival instinct. Belief would be forced. If God were to force belief, or provide proof of divine existence, then my free will would be forfeit and my alliance would be synthetic. God’s relationship to me would be that of creator and robot. I believe that the desired relationship is more akin to parent / child. That is the reason that we have free will.

As for your questions: “You REQUIRE a God to feel compassion, or to practice respect? Is this because you fear HELLFIRE?” and “What kind of monster are you, inside, that you must be compelled so, by ancient tales, to act like a reasonable human being?”

I do not believe that God will reject me to either eternal death or torture. If there is hell, it would be eternal separation from God. If my fate falls thus, then it will be because I have rejected God – to his dismay. If I am to truly have free will, it is necessary that I must enjoy or suffer the results thereof. To reject God may simply result in not living beyond corporeal death. I don’t know yet.

So, my respect or compassion for you is not dependent upon the threat of torture or compelled by ancient tales. It results from my confidence that God created you as he did all. Though I may not posses the vision or wisdom to see why, you must be valued by God as a potentially eternal being. I will trust that. You are protected from my base instincts. If you are indeed the highest authority for your own moral code, then I am fully aware that I am protected from your instincts only as far as it suits you.

guitargirl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but why must we force others to
> > follow our ideas (superstitions)?
>
> Some investigation into the claims in the Bible
> might enlighten you as to why people would cling
> to the hope God promises and provides.
>
> What you call 'superstition' is something a
> born-again Christian would die for. I'm not
> talking about Roman arenas . . . people today risk
> their lives to follow Jesus Christ, the only One
> through whom a relationship with God is possible.
> Did you know that Christians are at this moment
> being killed, beaten and driven from their homes
> which along with their churches are being burnt to
> the ground? (Orissa State in India.) This is one
> tiny piece of the current persecution picture, but
> here is a question worth pondering. Would you be
> willing to die for any cause, Jim? Could you place
> your faith in a God who keeps His promises?
>
> The God of the Bible (the ONLY God) guarantees
> eternal life (yes, beyond the grave) to those who
> repent (turn away from their commandment-breaking
> life) and put their trust in Christ (God the
> Savior.) Heaven is a real place, and so is hell.
> The Bible is real clear on who goes where. Don't
> rely on what the culture (news media, college,
> movies) teaches you. If you truly seek Him, you
> will find Him; another one of His promises. If you
> unltimately find it impossible to believe . . .
> you too are still in the Bible! Romans 1:19-21 For
> what can be known about God is plain to them
> because God has shown it to them. For His
> invisible attributes, namely His eternal power and
> divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever
> since the creation of the world, in the things
> that have been made. For although they knew God,
> they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to
> Him, but they became FUTILE IN THEIR THINKING, AND
> THEIR FOOLISH HEARTS WERE DARKENED. (Emphasis
> mine.)
>
> Finally, to your last point . . . a Believer
> cannot FORCE you to do anything. But Jim, if YOU
> knew that a blind person was heading for a cliff
> and did not say a word to stop him/her, I think
> you'd agree that you bear some resposibility for
> their demise, having failed to warn them. Eternal
> death is far worse than mere physical death. I
> shudder to think that part of the torment in hell
> will include memories of all the chances God gave
> you to come to Him. I just want the chance to
> greet you in heaven, where we can remember this
> 'exchange of comments.' But the choice is yours
> alone. All I can do is tell you what I know.


It must be pretty satisfying to imagine all of those people who use arguments you can't understand to discredit your silly supersititious worldview burning in eternal torment. If you really want to make a positive difference, get down off the cross, honestly and ruthlessly examine your own beliefs, and realize that most agnostics have given the issue WAY more thought and consideration than their religious-minded brethren. In fact, I can guarantee it. Eternal ignorance is far worse than mere physical death.

Miles T Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cassamandra Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Okay, but I still think Dr. Collins didn't
> get
> > a
> > > fair shot at defending his beliefs
> > scientifically.
> > > He's a brilliant scientist mapping the human
> > > genome. It's unfair to dismiss his beliefs as
> a
> > > mere neurological disorder. You know, if you
> > come
> > > across a house in the middle of the forest,
> > it's
> > > reasonable to conclude it was designed and
> > > constructed for a purpose. To say it evolved
> > just
> > > because you haven't met the designer wouldn't
> > make
> > > sense.
> >
> > That's an argument to infinite regression --
> while
> > causality is one of the forms in which the
> human
> > mind apprehends reality, it doesn't lead you to
> a
> > starting point at which the question can stop.
> As
> > every five-year-old asks: if god made
> everything,
> > who made god? within the rules of causality,
> there
> > can be no first cause.
>
>
> Causality's a problem whether you believe in
> Creation or the Big Bang. What was there before
> the Big Bang?? Look, let's just build a time
> machine, go back w/a digital camcorder and record
> it. All I'm saying is, the house gives evidence
> of design, the Mozart symphony gives evidence of
> design, the Mona Lisa gives evidence of design,
> the human body (mapped out by DNA) gives evidence
> of design. The Ultimate Causality of Everything --
> neither one of us was there.

Miles, this sort of reasoning is the ultimate example of a dog chasing its tail, or "ouroboric," if you want to be a bit more poetic. Creation myths, and they are just that, have been so discredited by modern knowledge and skeptical investigation (these myths, were, after all, nothing more than a way to explain the unknown) that it seems infantile to cling to a belief system just because it cannot be disproven. You don't see a problem with this sort of logic? Really? I can understand farmers and sheepherders believing this stuff thousands of years ago when germs didn't exist because you couldn't see them, the earth was flat because it sure looked like it, and the sun circled the earth because it made more sense that way, but we don't have the luxury of ignorance any more. I wish you would update your centuries-old thinking, even if it takes a toll on your worldview. I promise it's worth the intellectual exercise.

inanetranshuman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's disappointing the lack of respect that people
> are bestowing upon each other. Perhaps the
> general tone of this thread suggested to you that
> I was an intolerant, decrying all devouts as
> comically stupid. I re-read my post many times
> trying to determine why you would have immediately
> started out with a derogatory remark. You must
> understand that I included the word "supposed",
> b/c I obviously don't maintain its veracity. It
> was not meant to be pejorative.
> It appears readily obvious to me that your
> intelligent, please don't assume that I'm an
> ignoramus. While I'm not a biblical scholar, I've
> actually read the bible multiple times. I have
> also invested a lot of time reading the works of
> both biblical scholars and historians. My
> understanding of Psalm 137:9
> is its referring to the killing of Babylonian
> children in the vengeful justice sense. You seem
> to be suggesting that the Israelites are referring
> to sparing their own children a life of
> subservience in death. Obviously, I could be
> misunderstanding your point of view. My original
> point was based upon a reflection I've had about
> some of the more sticky verses in the bible. I've
> often wondered if those stories were translated
> into the parlance of our culture would we find
> them moral. I remember reading about a study where
> biblical stories were read to devouts with the
> names substituted for some other civilizations
> rulers. The devouts all agreed that those stories
> were morally reprehensible.
> Ultimately, I commend your tolerance for other
> people beliefs. My retort was aimed at
> philosophical dialogue. I would not presume to
> fully grasp your conception of god. However, I
> imagine your conception of god and my conception
> of the wondrous and mysterious universe have some
> overlap. If you like to engage in dialogue for
> both entertainment and mutual enlightenment, feel
> free to respond with any additional counterpoints
> or perspectives.
>
I appreciate your post, and am sorry I insulted you. Thanks for your kind thoughts and your tolerance as well. You make a good point about that verse, as it could probably be taken either way. If it was written with a sense of vengeance, I don't think we can chalk it up to the Lord, but to imperfect humans taking the law of Moses "eye for an eye" to an extreme instead of the better way the Lord said in the New Testament of praying for your enemies.

In any event, I have no additional counterpoints at the moment. It's too bad some of what we say comes across less kind over the internet than it would in person due to the anonymity of this medium. For that, I again apologize. I am convinced most religions and concepts of God have an immense amount of overlap, and that there is some good in all. I don't believe things from many, but I think they originally all sparng from a single source of truth before being corrupted because the Lord allows people an immense amount of leeway in making their own choices...even when they negatively affext others. In any event, friend, I have enjoyed this discussion. Have a great night.

Since there is no proof that there is a "god", since no one can define that notion without astonishing contradictions, any sentence that includes that word in it, as though something real were thereby named, is a sentence devoid of meaning. Might as well use the utterance "unie" instead.

The scary thing is we have a president that thinks god talks to him yet conceived the horrific blunder in Iraq causing thousands of deaths. Now we have a VP candidate that make the current President look like an athiest. My fear is that the religious right won't be satisfied until they turn the USA into a theocracy run by Christian taliban, forcing prayer in schools and throwing women and doctors in jail for abortion. Don't think it couldn't happen. Look at the Palin rallies. As she incites the crowd, they say awful things. Those folks will be sitting in thier usual pew on Sunday.

Between those who believe and those who do not, the major difference is simply this: believers hold as certain that the answers revelation has given to them are absolutely true. Non-believers recognize that "Certainty is the surest sign of Ignorance".

@R. Miller

I cannot write much at the moment, as I must head home. Clearly, you are quick to presume to know my Mind, and attribute to me both statements and beliefs which I have not yet made. Perhaps you envision waging battle against an atheistic horde (and what a fascinating picture that might be?)

e.g., I have neither characterized the Universe as an "accident", nor called anyone an "idiot".

My belief in the timeless Inevitability of this existence, and my unending Faith in Science, only further my disinterest in the Gospels surrounding this Nazarene, who would call himself the offspring of a Diety, like some Hercules leading a charge of doves.

I don't know the answers yet. You presume to know, even as you would deign speak my thoughts for me. Yet, in mine eyes, you do little more than repeat what you have been told, as your ancestors were told, as slaves were told, as children barely speaking were told by men in robes, relentlessly over eons of imagining, bound in this strange mythical chain to Ages long past we know to be seeped in ignorance and barbarity..

And you do it, as you say, with Joy

Hey, if you want to believe what some dead guy said about the afterlife thousands of years ago, with nothing to back him up but the Stone Age-level "science" that they had back then, be my guest. You'll be sticking with a myth structure that was created when people thought the Sun WAS God, that he slept under the Earth every night until he rose again to watch over everyone all day. That or, going by today's images, that he's some old bearded white dude who's idea of exercising omnipotent power and knowledge is to sit around and watch people eat and drink and live and die all day, with some kind of vague "plan" that may or may not mean that you get killed by a murderer or maimed in an accident or struck with some genetic disease that will end your life years before your time.

The truth is that no matter how much anyone tries to couch Jesus' message in the religion of Christianity, the religion itself goes against his teachings of living a simple life, free from corruptible influences (i.e. Pharisees and Bishops), helping each other live good, long lives. And the worst part about it is that people are confusing "faith" with "something I've been told all my life and choose not to try to prove in any way".

People who interpret Genesis literally are the prime worst example. Some human wrote a book that says God created the Earth in seven days. Well, not only does the story never mention Adam or Eve chronicling the event as it happened, it also ascribes the human definition of a "day" to an otherwise all-powerful being. What's a day to God, a being who apparently has and will live forever? Science can estimate the age of the universe, our sun, and our planet, but people will choose to believe that the Almighty God works on a 24 hour schedule, just because we do?

Bill Maher is right, and a lot of people have some growing up to do.

R. Miller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


Knowing God's "form" is not necessary for knowing of his existence.agreed

Quit imposing your agnostic ignorance upon me. You can only speak for yourself not knowing. You cannot speak for me.
there is no you or me of any substance,that we perceive ordinarily

No Man In The sky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Saw the movie this weekend-it's hilarious and
> reaffirms the many of the great wars stemmed from
> religious ideology. Bill does not judge or make
> fun of the many believers in this film; instead,
> they embarass themselves.

Yep, 100+ million people were murdered in the 20th Century by socialist and communist religious fanatics!

The Weather Underground, Black Panthers, Hells Angels, gangs, and drug cartels were all commanded by Jesus to slay the infidel!

alien Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> R. Miller Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > The trouble with atheists is that you haven't
> > found God nor seen his presence in the spirits
> of
> > others simply because you're not looking.
>
> The trouble with ye faithful is your belief that
> "kindness" springs only from God. You,
> apparently, do not possess it innately. Thus, you
> cannot see it borne in others.

Uh, no. We do not believe that. Kindness can be found in anyone. Evil can be found in anyone. We were all created with the knowledge of good and evil and the free will to choose among them.

>
> What demons would inhabit you, otherwise? I
> tremble at the thought..
>
> We already commit to "ideals and lifestyles", and
> require no assistance from mystical beings. I do
> not lead a "hedonistic" lifestyle: I have
> children whom I would die for, go to work
> everyday, and contribute $ to various charitable
> causes. Who are you to question this because your
> Israelite Yahweh is not in my family portrait?

Your family, your work, your charitable contributions are meaningless without God, because in your world view all of humanity was the result of a grand, cosmic accident.

If you slaughtered your family, shirked in your work, and stole from the poor your actions would have no effect on an indifferent universe which doesn't care what you do.

Every breath you take to assert that your life has purpose, your love has meaning, and your good works are worthwhile asserts the existence of a Creator.

>
> >In a universe without God, you are an
> > accident - totally without purpose - and
> neither
> > your existence nor your actions are of any
> > consequence whatsoever.
>
> This must be where you articulate your own fear.
> While you do this, I will continue to fashion
> "purpose", and measure "consequence".. I find
> myself allied with many enlightened folk across
> the planet in this regard. You may continue to
> huddle with your fellows in worship.

I have no fear. You are no more the creator of your own purpose than you are the creator of yourself. You are not enlightened - you walk in darkness and ignorance.

We don't huddle - we embrace in joy.
>
> >Without God, you cannot
> > make a case for any code of moral values, any
> > standards of behavior, or even the preservation
> of
> > mankind.
>
> No. YOU cannot make the case. We can, we have,
> and you simply ignore it.

I've already made the case. In your world, morality is meaningless. Your next thought or action is no more meaningful than a pebble rolling down a hill because a gust of wind blew it that way. As a collection of organized molecules resulting from a great cosmic accident, you are driven merely by chemical and physiological reactions. There is no "reason" to love and protect your child any more than there is reason to carve him up for tonight's meal. Johnny...it's what's for dinner!

>
> >Without God, there is no existential
> > preference between monasticism, enterprise, or
> > genocide. The universe would be indifferent to
> you
> > serving in the peace corps, raping a 3 year old
> > boy, or hiding in your closet in a catatonic
> > state.
>
> One of my sons is 3 years of age. Consider the
> fate of one who would visit such a crime against
> his flesh, and dare call my VENGEANCE
> "indifference"..! As a Creature of this Universe,
> I challenge your every utterance regarding my
> motivations or intentions. I invite your God to
> visit my thoughts. Consider, elsewhere, His
> INDIFFERENCE to the suffering in Darfur, as limbs
> are hacked from the screaming, mothers ravaged,
> villages burned..

God is not "indifferent" to suffering. He created mankind with free will and an uncertain earthly fate as a GIFT. If is our duty to seek peace and love despite a world which rewards depravity. It is by overcoming such evil that we earn the Kingdom of Heaven.

Again, in YOUR world view the Universe was created in an explosion. Gravity, energy, and magnetism caused particles to form atoms. Atoms combined to make molecules. Molecules combined to form organic matter. From that, life was formed. Life was a self-sustaining equillibrium which created more life. Life evolved.

But in that theory your entire existence was an accident. Your shape, your form, your thoughts were all derived from random forces operating on predictable ones. That we survived to evolve and develop intelligence was infinitessimally improbable. And what is that intellect? Merely chemical reactions in your brain that responds to stimulus. Your sense of love is just a hormonal response to stimulus. Your empathy for a starving African you never met is just a mind trick you play on yourself.

If you love your child, the Universe doesn't care. If you eat your child for dinner, the Universe doesn't care. In fact, since some living creatures actually eat their children for dinner, one wonders why you shouldn't follow their example of survival. You can marry several dozen wives and have a tasty meal at regular birthing intervals until you all die of old age. The human race will die out, but so what?

What is the duty of a random confluence of matter and energy to sustain its own kind? Does the sun care that another star just went supernova? Does the sun fear it's death? Does the sun take pleasure in providing warmth for us?

No, the sun just does what the sun does. And you just do what you do. And there's no reason or purpose for either you or the sun to do anything other than what you are inclined to do. The sun has no reason, so its choices are limited. You have reason, so your choices are many. But NONE of your choices have purpose or meaningful consequence because they are all just responses to and causes of stimulus.

>
> >
> > You would be no more important than any other
> > randomly assembled collection of atoms and
> energy
> > in the entire universe and would share a
> similar
> > lack of purpose for being.
>
> Do you crave "importance" so deeply? More to the
> point, must that itself derive only from On High?

If I have no importance, then nothing I do or choose matters. It MUST be derived from "on high" because there is no where else from which it could be obtained.

An accidental creation imbues you with no sense of purpose.

>
>
> If I must state it to avoid being discounted in
> spiritual circles, I consider the Universe, with
> all its Immensity and Vasty Awesomeness, is the
> very thing that is Divine, and We have Emerged out
> of it, in possession of Mind, and that is a
> stupefying thought which fills me with Awe. I
> revere the Science which Seeks to unravel this
> mystery.

You revere a science which relies upon limited human senses and limited human understanding which will NEVER reveal to you the full extent of knowledge. Ironically, it is the biggest and most important question to our existence which science will NEVER answer - WHY ARE WE HERE?

Science can answer what, where, when, and how. It can NEVER answer why.

>
> This has very little to do, in my mind, with
> ancient tales out of the Middle East, as a desert
> tribe struggled for existence on the fringes of
> Empires. No more would I look to the frigid
> northlands, with its sagas of buxom Valkrie
> bearing the fallen to raucous Valhalla, but
> certainly that's what some of my ancestors
> believed, with all their hearts, before the Romans
> and the Christians came with their Word, and their
> Fire, their inquisitions and their witchhunts..
> When have you last thought to consider the pagans
> of your ancestry?

Man exists within time and comes to learn the truth within time, though it may take millenia. Apparently, your time has not come. What will you say and think if your 3 year old grows up to be a Roman Catholic priest or a Mormon, I wonder? Would you call him an idiot believing in invisible mystic creatures?

You prefer to seek your "truth" from far more dubious sources. Einstein went to his death denying the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle which is generally regarded as scientific fact. Your "science" is no more infallible than my religion.

BTW, I'm a scientist...an Economist...and I reckon you would have none of that truth because that doesn't suit you either.

R. Miller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

If there is no why, you have no purpose. You have no why unless there is a God.

alien Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> R. Miller Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------<

The trouble with atheists is that you haven't found God nor seen his presence in the spirits others simply because you're not looking.

> --------------------------------------------------<

or, not looking in the right place i.e. inward


The trouble with ye faithful is your belief that "kindness" springs only from God.

You, apparently, do not possess it innately. Thus, you cannot see it borne in others.
humbug


The faithful choose to have faith in man-made 'visions' Is not The Absolute the key, and therefore no dogma etc.

R. Miller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The trouble with atheists is that you haven't
> found God nor seen his presence in the spirits of
> others simply because you're not looking.

The trouble with ye faithful is your belief that "kindness" springs only from God. You, apparently, do not possess it innately. Thus, you cannot see it borne in others.

What demons would inhabit you, otherwise? I tremble at the thought..


> You're afraid to find Him because it will involve
> responsible commitment to ideals and lifestyles
> which are inconvenient for your hedonistic
> lifestyle.

We already commit to "ideals and lifestyles", and require no assistance from mystical beings. I do not lead a "hedonistic" lifestyle: I have children whom I would die for, go to work everyday, and contribute $ to various charitable causes. Who are you to question this because your Israelite Yahweh is not in my family portrait?

>In a universe without God, you are an
> accident - totally without purpose - and neither
> your existence nor your actions are of any
> consquence whatsoever.

This must be where you articulate your own fear. While you do this, I will continue to fashion "purpose", and measure "consequence".. I find myself allied with many enlightened folk across the planet in this regard. You may continue to huddle with your fellows in worship.

>Without God, you cannot
> make a case for any code of moral values, any
> standards of behavior, or even the preservation of
> mankind.

No. YOU cannot make the case. We can, we have, and you simply ignore it.

>Without God, there is no existential
> preference between monasticism, enterprise, or
> genocide. The universe would be indifferent to you
> serving in the peace corps, raping a 3 year old
> boy, or hiding in your closet in a catatonic
> state.

One of my sons is 3 years of age. Consider the fate of one who would visit such a crime against his flesh, and dare call my VENGEANCE "indifference"..! As a Creature of this Universe, I challenge your every utterance regarding my motivations or intentions. I invite your God to visit my thoughts. Consider, elsewhere, His INDIFFERENCE to the suffering in Darfur, as limbs are hacked from the screaming, mothers ravaged, villages burned..

>
> You would be no more important than any other
> randomly assembled collection of atoms and energy
> in the entire universe and would share a similar
> lack of purpose for being.

Do you crave "importance" so deeply? More to the point, must that itself derive only from On High?

If I must state it to avoid being discounted in spiritual circles, I consider the Universe, with all its Immensity and Vasty Awesomeness, is the very thing that is Divine, and We have Emerged out of it, in possession of Mind, and that is a stupefying thought which fills me with Awe. I revere the Science which Seeks to unravel this mystery.

This has very little to do, in my mind, with ancient tales out of the Middle East, as a desert tribe struggled for existence on the fringes of Empires. No more would I look to the frigid northlands, with its sagas of buxom Valkrie bearing the fallen to raucous Valhalla, but certainly that's what some of my ancestors believed, with all their hearts, before the Romans and the Christians came with their Word, and their Fire, their inquisitions and their witchhunts.. When have you last thought to consider the pagans of your ancestry?