Christian faith in TrekLit?

[rahullak]

If God created man, who created God? If intelligence requires creation, then surely an omnipotent, omnipresent being needs to have been created, yes?

 

[Captain Robert April]

Well, that just about wraps it up for God...

 

[ProtoAvatar]

I've also never understood why it matters to one person, or group what another person or group believes.

Because, if the Law of Non-Contradiction applies to reality, and that two contradictory ideas cannot both be true, there can only be one conclusion--if a specific faith is held to be true, than a different faith proposing opposing answers to the question answered by the first faith--than both cannot be true. They can both be false...but that only means that there is another philosophy out there which does give the truth.

Bull. That attitude comes from taking religion too literally, as if it were a matter of concrete fact.[...]

Besides, as I said, human religions are metaphors. Maybe they're metaphors for some higher divine essence to the universe, or maybe they're just metaphors for a good and just way for human beings to live their lives and relate to the universe around them. Either way, it's petty and narrow to assume that only one of those metaphors can contain any truth. Since they are metaphorical, they can be different without necessarily being contradictory. They can all be taken as different interpretations of the same underlying truth, whether that truth is genuinely divine or merely philosophical and moral. The point of the parable (at least as I'm using it) is not that there has to be a God; it's that different interpretations of the universe can be compatible if you don't get too hung up on the details and differences.

Christopher, for the believer, his religion IS literal, a matter of concrete fact.
There's nothing metaphorical about his religion; it is objective truth.
You will not encounter statements like 'maybe what this holy book says is wrong or not quite right', etc in any religion.

During history - and at present -, this applied/applies to every single religion; and then, there are also the divisions and sects that diverged because their ontological truths were slightly different.
What is 'canon'?
A lot of blood was spilled throughout the ages because no religion views its teachings as 'metaphorical'.

As usual, Christopher, you try to take a squeaky-clean, politically correct, liberal stance.
Only, this time, it rings false. You don't talk about religion and faith as they were - and are -, but as you would wish them to be.

 

[Almost Unique]

If God created man, who created God? If intelligence requires creation, then surely an omnipotent, omnipresent being needs to have been created, yes?

Not if he has the power of being in himself.

After all, I'm not convinced that matter has the power of being.

 

[Almost Unique]

who is this 'God' person anyway?

And what does he need with a starship?

 

[Thestral]

You will not encounter statements like 'maybe what this holy book says is wrong or not quite right', etc in any religion.

Not getting into your overall point - but this is absolutely not true.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

You will not encounter statements like 'maybe what this holy book says is wrong or not quite right', etc in any religion.

Not getting into your overall point - but this is absolutely not true.

First - let's see the examples.
Second - what is your 'point', then?

 

[Rush Limborg]

Wow. Rare indeed is the time when ProtoAvatar actually stands up for my side--albeit in his usual...forthright manner.

I certainly believe man is inherently a rational being,

That is exactly my point. Rational beings are able to admit that their own assumptions may be incorrect, and that it is arrogant and intolerant to dismiss alternative points of view as automatically wrong. Only irrational fools assume they are in possession of the absolute truth about anything.

Chris...isn't that last statement an assumption of abolute truth? "Only irrational fools assume..."?

If God created man, who created God? If intelligence requires creation, then surely an omnipotent, omnipresent being needs to have been created, yes?

Cute--but, no. Creation requires intelligence--not necessarily the other way around.

 

[Rush Limborg]

I certainly believe man is inherently a rational being,

Don't worry, life will disabuse you of that notion eventually.

Oh, you'd be suprised at how cynical I can get, Sci. The TNZ and Misc. threads tend to put me in that sort of mood....

 

[Sci]

I certainly believe man is inherently a rational being,

Don't worry, life will disabuse you of that notion eventually.

Oh, you'd be suprised at how cynical I can get, Sci. The TNZ and Misc. threads tend to put me in that sort of mood....

Oh, I don't even think that recognizing that people are not inherently rational is itself cynicism. It's just an acknowledgment of how the human mind actually works -- it's driven by equal parts passion and rationality.

 

[rahullak]

If God created man, who created God? If intelligence requires creation, then surely an omnipotent, omnipresent being needs to have been created, yes?

Cute--but, no. Creation requires intelligence--not necessarily the other way around.

That still doesn't answer the question: If God created man, who created God?

 

[JustKate]

^ Your question, Rahullak, presupposes that God is a...a creature or being or entity that had to have been created. But since we don't actually know what God is (I, at least, do not), that's a pretty big supposition, isn't it? When did time start? If we cannot answer that question, or we think we can but we cannot all agree on one answer, does that mean there is no such thing as time?

 

[label]

If God created man, who created God? If intelligence requires creation, then surely an omnipotent, omnipresent being needs to have been created, yes?

Cute--but, no. Creation requires intelligence--not necessarily the other way around.

That still doesn't answer the question: If God created man, who created God?

Ok, that old question and the "Can God create a rock he can't lift" variation wouldn't even get you into the kiddie game of "Throw a ring around the duck" contest at the Christian apologetics fair.

So, take just a second to think through this. People who claim God created people are positing that God created the universe we exist in and all the applicable laws of physics, including causality and linear time.

For God to be a viable candidate for Creation, He would have to transcend those very laws which require causality in order to be an explanation that would itself not require an another cause. The reason God doesn't need a creator is that in order for something to have a need to be "created", there has to have been a state where it did not exist at some point in time in the past. Since God created time, He has always existed (since He is, after all, not subject to the laws and confines of linear time that He created in the first place) and therefore does not require an explanation for His creation in the first place.

 

[Smellincoffee]

It's funny. Assuming that the universe "Just Exists' when we know perfectly well it exists (and if you doubt it, walk into a closed door) is apparently impossible for people, even though we've no reason to state anything beyond that.

However -- assuming that there is a Thing out there called God that is intelligent, creative, etc, created everything, is very interested in humanity, wants to be worshiped, and is in the habit of sending down prophets and avatars to Earth -- that people will accept easily, happily, and deride others for their lack of faith.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Well, the universe is bound by scientific laws, which are part of its existance. Therefore, whatever (or whoever) caused the universe to begin (and even evolutionists concede that it did begin--see: The Big Bang Theory) probably therefore also created said laws.

If the universe--space--was created by something (or someone), we must therefore assume that this source is not limited by space.

As time is considered a dimension of space (Einstein's spacetime continuum), said creator must also be held to have created time--and is therefore not limited by time.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Don't worry, life will disabuse you of that notion eventually.

Oh, you'd be suprised at how cynical I can get, Sci. The TNZ and Misc. threads tend to put me in that sort of mood....

Oh, I don't even think that recognizing that people are not inherently rational is itself cynicism. It's just an acknowledgment of how the human mind actually works -- it's driven by equal parts passion and rationality.

You realize that you seem to have agreed with me, in saying that the human mind is driven in part by rationality.

I do not deny the influence of emotion/passion. Nonetheless, that does not give cause for dismissing inherent rationality. Humans are inherently rational and inherently emotional. I was simply focusing on the rational.

 

[JB2005]

Don't, it's overrated! Whatever rationality we might pretend to have goes out the window when our emotions kick in! Sometimes the two coincide...but otherwise no chance mate!

 

[label]

However -- assuming that there is a Thing out there called God that ..... wants to be worshiped

Where are you getting this from? I've never seen anywhere in Christian teachings where God instructs His people to "Worship Me".

and is in the habit of sending down prophets and avatars to Earth -- that people will accept easily, happily, and deride others for their lack of faith.

Again, you seem to be stating something that is in direct contradiction with the core principals of the Christian faith. While humans are flawed and may succumb to deriding people for various reasons, the philosophy of Christianity explicitly proscribes such behavior. Be careful not to condemn the ideology with those who choose not to live up to it.

 

[JB2005]

Where are you getting this from? I've never seen anywhere in Christian teachings where God instructs His people to "Worship Me".

I am the Lord Thy God, Thou shalt have no other gods before me...

or something like that...

how about when God destroyed the tower of babel, because people were matching his might instead of kowtowing?

or when humans were ejected from Eden because they ate the forbidden fruit and saw their nakedness?

seriously, read the bible, there's a whole lot of crazy shit in there...genesis in particular! reading that damn book is what STOPPED me being a christian.

 

[label]

Where are you getting this from? I've never seen anywhere in Christian teachings where God instructs His people to "Worship Me".

I am the Lord Thy God, Thou shalt have no other gods before me...

Put yourself in "God''s perspective for this one......if you were the actual God and you knew that other 'gods' were causing problems for people because they were getting bad advice, wouldn't you say, "Hey dummies, I'm the real God, listen to me!".??

How about when God destroyed the tower of babel, because people were matching his might instead of kowtowing?

- I don't believe the "Tower of Babel" to be an actual historical account of something that occurred.
- Even if it were, the point of the story is not to make people "worship" God, it is to not to place undue faith in mankind....something that should be incredibly evident based on where "we've" taken this world

or when humans were ejected from Eden because they ate the forbidden fruit and saw their nakedness?

Again, I don't take the story of A & Eve literally, however, what does being punished for disobeying a rule have to do with God saying "Worship me"? God said, don't eat the fruit. They did anyway. They were punished. What about that has anything to do with "Worship"?