Well, Einstein certainly spoke of
wanting to read the mind of God. If you stop for a moment to consider the utter weirdness of the universe and human consciousness, you would either be lacking in imagination or have a Dawkins-style axe to grind, to dismiss outright the possibility of a God.

People who boldly state, "There is no God" - especially those who do so brandishing their scientific erudition before them - get my goat because this is not an issue that can be resolved scientifically. And lesser minds are impressed and thus absolve themselves of the responsibility of - and joy in - finding their own truth.

Of course, just as bad are the religious nutcases who try to convince their flock that they have all the answers, too. In fact, if anything they're freakier because of the minutely detailed yet completely arbitrary dogma they've swallowed.

Apologies for length but the issue is infinite.
(Happybara The jungle came alive and took him, Thu 12 Aug 2010, 18:10, 4 replies)

I may not believe in God, but I certainly don't believe in Richard Dawkins.

( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Thu 12 Aug 2010, 18:23, closed)

You don't have to. He's still there.

(Falstaff's Spiritual Successor, Thu 12 Aug 2010, 19:51, closed)

if there is one
we don't know what it is,

Science has done a good job of explaining how organinc life (and hence ourselves) came to be in existence on this planet i fail to see at what stage in the process a deity clicked his fingers and created life, since all the steps involved don't require any magical input and they can happen on their own.

However there is yet to be any major consensus on what happened prior to the big bang, so the another being casuing the event, can't be logically disproven, not with current knowledge anyway. Although if this "god" did exist, i severly doubt that it is even close to any of incarnations of god(s) that have been developed by mankind, and i severley doubt that this being has any divine plan for us, or even any active input in the workings of the world!

God/religion as we know it is just a system of social management born out of an understanding of the world based soley on what can be observed with the naked eye. What most relgions teach about generalties are of life are fine, and most people seem to get on well regardless of religion or lack of. It's when you get the dawkins on one side and hamzas or Hovinds on the other it just drives a wedge between people who otherwise would have not cared!

apols for length, but you are very right the subject is infinitly improbable!
(dougthegoat trapped his mohawk in the car door, Thu 12 Aug 2010, 18:55, closed)

It may be impossible to determine the existence of a supreme being, true
but if it does exist, bollocks is it the god of the Bible.
(Falstaff's Spiritual Successor, Thu 12 Aug 2010, 19:55, closed)

+1

(Vice Admiral Sir Charles Cockbrush KCB MBE DSO, who is finding it increasingly difficult to log into b3ta.com wants to duck your aunt and kick your puppy, Fri 13 Aug 2010, 10:17, closed)

Agreed.
Still, there is much wisdom in the Gospels and the teachings of Christ. And alas much vindictive bollocks in the likes of Lamentations and Leviticus.
(Happybara The jungle came alive and took him, Fri 13 Aug 2010, 10:55, closed)

Einstein was speaking figuratively.
Noone sensibly - not even Dawkins - claims definitively that there is no god. The claim is that there is no place for god, no need for god to explain the world, that the god hypothesis actually makes explanations more complicated, no reason to believe in god... therefore why bring god into it?

If someone can produce one single phenomenon that is best explained by a deity - and "I can't think of a better explanation" is not good enough - then that's evidence for a deity. Not proof, but evidence. No such phenomenon has yet been produced.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Aug 2010, 23:45, closed)