Forums → WEPR → whats the difference?
| 183 | 43808 |
so,just about everybody has ruled out the possiblity of their being spcific Gods for a element.Such as the greek Gods,what is the difference however between believing in "mythology" and say for instance a Christan religion.Why is it more beliveable?Does anybody have a answer to why it is more believed that their is one God and not many? Why do people who believe in a God not realize that they are believing in the same thing that they also call rubbish?
- 183 Replies
Craig Venter has already created bacteria DNA from scratch....
and none of these hypotheses will ever be proven for a long long time, so arguing about it is a little pointless.
Well, when you come and talk nonsense about how only god makes sense and there is no evidence and ****, we show you hypotheses and ways that explain how it is indeed possible, even though the details are still disputed; but that doesn't mean that the general idea is wrong. It makes you sound hypocritic now to say that arguing about it is pointless.
p.s. I say this because the only way to prove it would be to create life ourselves, and that, according to the hypotheses themselves, takes a long time to happen.
Show how the single steps are possible, and you're done. No need to sit in front of a glass of water for millenias. The Miller-Urey experiment was one of those experiments that showed how organic molecules can form naturally under certain circumstances, and as such, an important step. You don't need to show how you can get from point 1 to 3 if you can show how to get from 1 to 2 and from 2 to 3 and explain the link between the two processes.
Craig Venter has already created bacteria DNA from scratch....
If this God fellow exists then Craig one upped him by remembering to put watermarks on his. Which are,
1) Code table for entire alphabet with punctuations
2) Names of 46 contributing scientists
3) Three quotations
4) The web address for the cell.
Yep, not to mention all 4 watermarks booted up. Cost of creating life? 40 million, 10 years, and "God's" monopoly is broken.
So I've been following this thread for some time now, and I've really enjoyed the debate so far. But it seems have to derailed a bit (although in a very interesting way) from the main point of the OP: what is the difference between believing in, say, the Greek gods and believing in the Christian god? The answer, of course, depends on the kind of difference we want to focus on. There are epistemological, philosophical, theological, metaphysical, and scientific differences between the two doctrines - just to name a few. But I take it that there's a distinct flavour the responses to this question might take, and I'd like to explore each in turn.
Response 1: The Obvious
There are, of course, some obvious differences between Greek mythology and Christianity. Perhaps the most obvious of these is that many, many people believe in a Christian god and not the Greek gods. But, of course, the fact that lots of people believe in something does not imply that the thing in question is true. It's not so hard to imagine humans, perhaps several hundred years in the future, holding Christianity in the same regard as we hold Greek mythology. Maybe even one day, it will be referred to as 'Christian mythology'. It's sort of like Latin - it's beautiful as a language and worth intellectual study, but it's not terribly effective as a language - especially in modern society.
Response 2: There's more evidence for Christianity
This is a narrow route to pursue, but one that many people take. There's no end to the amount of evidence offered in favour of a Christian god - and let's face it, there seems to be no evidence whatsoever for the Greek gods. But a moment's pause on this thought will reveal that it can't even get off the ground. Any time there's a thunderstorm, we have evidence for the Greek god, Zeus. Whenever someone enjoys some wine or beer, perhaps they should thank Bacchus. There are a number of natural phenomena that were at one time attributed to one god or another, so it would seem that these occurrences provide evidence for their existence. But, of course, we now know that wine doesn't ferment because of Bacchus's intervention and thunder is not a result of Zeus's fury. Which leads us to:
Response 3: Belief in a Christian god is more rational
This response is certainly the most compelling of the three. We live in a universe that is absolutely improbable. Period. The existence of some intelligent being seems to be the only reason why we're here. But ultimately, doesn't this response mirror the kind of thinking the ancient Greeks had? There was no ready explanation for thunder or why crops grow or why wine ferments. So supernatural beings were offered up in lieu of a reasonable explanation for how these things could happen. It's certainly true that our universe is improbable - given what we currently know. But it's also just as improbable that grapes would turn into wine without an understanding of the process that takes place. Perhaps we are simply nearing the end of another transitional phase where we are able to explain away any sort of supernatural entity.
If all this is right though (and I doubt that it is), then it would seem that believing in a Christian god is just as irrational as believing in the Greek gods. On the other side of the coin - belief in the Greek gods is just as rational as belief in a Christian god.
But clearly this isn't the case. So we still have left open the question - what on earth is the difference??
Even for the many atheists on this site (myself included), the answer to this question is incredibly important. We can certainly claim that belief in any god is totally irrational, which is how I like to view things. But that simply doesn't reflect the views of most people. Perhaps by honing in on whatever salient difference there is, we can begin to unravel the threads which theists still cling on to.
Moegreche I was hoping to see you post on the topic.
There are, of course, some obvious differences between Greek mythology and Christianity. Perhaps the most obvious of these is that many, many people believe in a Christian god and not the Greek gods.
Just a side note to this, but there was a time when lots of people believed in the Greek gods. Granted not as many as the Christian God but you do have to take into account how many people globally existed between the times as well and how easy it is for information to spread today. Simply put there are just factors that the Greek gods didn't have to work with.
Perhaps by honing in on whatever salient difference there is, we can begin to unravel the threads which theists still cling on to.
Of course one of the major differences is is that Christianity is a monotheism (or at the very least a pseudo monotheism) while the Greek and pretty much all of the earlier religions were polytheistic. Though I have no idea why a single God would be any more valid than that of having multiple gods. It should also be noted that Yahweh likely stemmed from a polytheism as one of a number of tribal gods before evolving into the current incarnation of a singular God.
(or at the very least a pseudo monotheismWhat is that supposed to mean?
also, how do you argue against the predictions made that have come true, for example:
'Flee out of Babylon; leave the land of the Babylonians, and be like the goats that lead the flock. For I will stir up and bring against Babylon an alliance of great nations from the land of the north. They will take up their positions against her, and from the north she will be captured... So Babylonia will be plundered;... Like a lion coming up from Jordan's thickets to a rich pastureland, I will chase Babylon from its land in an instant... Babylon will suddenly fall and be broken... I will fill you with men, as with a swarm of locusts, and they will shout in triumph over you... No rock will be taken from you for a cornerstone, nor any stone for a foundation, for you will be desolate forever,' declares the Lord.
The sea will rise over Babylon; its roaring waves will cover her. Her towns will be desolate, a dry and desert land, a land where no one lives... I will make her officials and wise men drunk,... they will sleep forever and not awake... Babylon's thick walls will be leveled... When you finish reading this scroll, tie a stone to it and throw it into the Euphrates. Then say, 'So will Babylon sink to rise no more...' (from Jeremiah chapters 50 and 51 NASB)
  'Flee out of Babylon; leave the land of the Babylonians, and be like the goats that lead the flock. For I will stir up and bring against Babylon an alliance of great nations from the land of the north. They will take up their positions against her, and from the north she will be captured... So Babylonia will be plundered;... Like a lion coming up from Jordan's thickets to a rich pastureland, I will chase Babylon from its land in an instant... Babylon will suddenly fall and be broken... I will fill you with men, as with a swarm of locusts, and they will shout in triumph over you... No rock will be taken from you for a cornerstone, nor any stone for a foundation, for you will be desolate forever,' declares the Lord.
  The sea will rise over Babylon; its roaring waves will cover her. Her towns will be desolate, a dry and desert land, a land where no one lives... I will make her officials and wise men drunk,... they will sleep forever and not awake... Babylon's thick walls will be leveled... When you finish reading this scroll, tie a stone to it and throw it into the Euphrates. Then say, 'So will Babylon sink to rise no more...' (from Jeremiah chapters 50 and 51 NASB)
The Mesopotamia hasn't sunk yet. That's all I have to say to the "rediction".
Or the fact that it's a very iffy and generalized "rophecy".
Back to thread. Hi Moe!
It depends doesn't it, on which denomination you belong to? Evangelicals seem no better than the ancient Greeks seeking literal answers to the natural world. Just like Zeus is attributes to control the weather, or Uranus creating the Earth, or Prometheus giving us fire, so too do evangelicals and Pentecostals use religion as an actual answer to what happens around them.
On the other hand more "liberal" forms of Chrisianity seem so attractive because they offer eternal salvation, paradise. We do have an Underworld in Greek mythology but this prize to be won, this ideal to be sought after isn't exactly the most prominent and conspicuous points of Greek religion. Perhaps that is what makes people flock to the banner of the Church, because they willfully and desperately want such a fervent hope to be true. Greek religion never inspired such passionate worship on such a large scale.
river has since shifted its course so that much of the remains on the former western part of the city are now inundated.
from the wiki article about Babylon
And what you said about the hope being true, Athiests are the same, but about science, not God.
And what you said about the hope being true, Athiests are the same, but about science, not God.
from your link:
scientifically answering the question, "does God exist?"
to answer something scientifically it has to be able to be tested and/or observed.
god is a made up myth that no one has ever observed, or tested.
and neither is it possible to test or observe god. therefor science and god (aka magic) can't co-exist.
if science does not have a full perspective of how and why something happens. that that is no reason to instantly fill the gap whit the words "god did it".
Read this, I think you might find it interesting.
sorry for dp, but found this after some searching
If all your evidence can fit into a blog post, you are probably wrong.
The conservation of matter does not prove god, I have no clue why this guy thinks it does. Actually, wouldn't god go against this, anyway? So their explanation is "Well your idea goes against science, therefore I can completely ignore science!". There is a ton of evidence on the creation of the universe, and the writer of this article did not read any of it.
As I mentioned the prophecy is so generalized that anything can fit in. There are so many gapping discrepancies that they remind one of what religious people always do; start with a final unchanging conclusion, then work backwards to fit in evidence by hook or by crook.
Ok but deviating horribly. As to my earlier point, would like to add that Christianity seems to offer a much more idealized and appealing picture to adore. Which might explain the differences.
Or perhaps the fact that the Greek Myths seem to possess mortal characters with much more human will, enterprise and spirit? That the Gods intervene but they do not control a fixed destiny?
Of course one of the major differences is is that Christianity is a monotheism (or at the very least a pseudo monotheism) while the Greek and pretty much all of the earlier religions were polytheistic. Though I have no idea why a single God would be any more valid than that of having multiple gods.
Interesting point. I think nichodemus might touch on a possible consequence of this fact:
Perhaps that is what makes people flock to the banner of the Church, because they willfully and desperately want such a fervent hope to be true. Greek religion never inspired such passionate worship on such a large scale.
This might explain why people adopted Judaism and later Christianity. This idea of forgiveness and of a God that loves us and wants us to be happy, rather than a bunch of gods who get off on screwing with us.
This is historically interesting and helps to explain the transition from early polytheistic religions to monotheistic or pseudo-monotheistic ones. (I agree with Mage that many Christian denominations are not technically monotheistic).
But perhaps we should hone our answers a bit more and engage one particular difference (or range of difference) between the Greek gods and the Christian god(s). My suggestion is to focus on the epistemological differences - whether one is more justified than the other in some relevant sense. Of course, this suggestion is pretty selfish, since it falls within my expertise. But I do think it might be the most relevant in showing the merits or faults of Christian faith. Certainly we should open to other lines of thought, however.
Finally, there this kind of thing:
Read this, I think you might find it interesting.
Trying to prove God's existence falls outside the ambit of this thread. I think we have an interesting question before us and should not get distracted by silliness like the above.
You must be logged in to post a reply!