Religious Beliefs

[mlarke]

This isn't meant to be a theological debate, but go ahead if you want to. I was at work today and for some reason or other a thought popped into my head: If you were involved with the Stargate program and discovered that an extremely advanced race of aliens, not too dissimilar from us physiologically, which I suppose is debateable, seeded life on here on Earth, and the galaxy(s) for that matter, would that alter your belief in God, whichever one that may be?

Also, after making this discovery would you be able to do your job effectively.

Personally, I would have no problem with it. I have never been the most faith driven individual, but I do respect that many are, more power to you. It has also been an idea I have had for a while, that we are a big alien experiment and they like to mess with us.

Have a nice day, now I need to put my tinfoil hat back on so they can't read my thoughts.

I have quoted myself, because I am both an egomaniac and too lazy to open a new window to see what I initially posted.

This thread was intended to be a hypothetical question posed to you if you were hypothetically involved in the Stargate program. I really wanted to get the word "hypothetical" in there again but I couldn't figure out how, oh wait I just did, bloody brilliant I am.

It seems that although I didn't really want this to turn into a theological debate that has transpired, you guys opted for the "but go ahead if you want to," portion of my sentence. I just wanted to point out that if go through the 7 or so pages of posts on here very few of you have actually managed to answer the question of, "How would the knowledge of aliens giving us life, and there simple existence, affect your belief in God?" It seems to be a simple quesion that doesn't necessarily require a convoluted inflammatory answer. Maybe just a "Yeah that would screw me up," or a simple, "No dude, I'd still be cool with what I have devoted my life to."

I can honestly say I don't give a damn either way, how you guys address the question, I was simply trying to get an answer to it. You can keep on flaming each other and quoting then answering if you want to, I have read some interesting stuff, like neat definitions from Wikipedia, I likes learnin'. Or, you can stop all of that childish garbage and just answer the freakin' question. It wasn't my intention to make posters in here have to defend their faith, or lack there of.

I've said my peace, now back to my tinfoil hat with newly installed antenae.

[shipper hannah]

If not killing was inbuilt, there wouldn't have been any killing happening. Feral children, those who grew up in the wild in isolation of human society, not only have no moral obstacles to killing, but exhibit no empathy whatsoever. They simply don't see other living beings as living beings. They likewise have no normal sexual response (they experience sexual arousal, but it is completely undirected, with no preference for a specific gender or even species). These behaviors are learned.


That, my friend, is precisely what we are discussing here- the other way they could have arisen.

i edited this after, sorry!

First, this is again a social phenomena. Second, their idea of empathy is not the human idea of empathy, and something tells me you wouldn't really want to live by the moral code of the chimp herd.

empathy is where our morals codes come from. the fact that chimps and other animals can experience empathy no matter how primitive, to me implies that our basic morality arose via evolution.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

I have quoted myself, because I am both an egomaniac and too lazy to open a new window to see what I initially posted.

This thread was intended to be a hypothetical question posed to you if you were hypothetically involved in the Stargate program. I really wanted to get the word "hypothetical" in there again but I couldn't figure out how, oh wait I just did, bloody brilliant I am.

It seems that although I didn't really want this to turn into a theological debate that has transpired, you guys opted for the "but go ahead if you want to," portion of my sentence. I just wanted to point out that if go through the 7 or so pages of posts on here very few of you have actually managed to answer the question of, "How would the knowledge of aliens giving us life, and there simple existence, affect your belief in God?" It seems to be a simple quesion that doesn't necessarily require a convoluted inflammatory answer. Maybe just a "Yeah that would screw me up," or a simple, "No dude, I'd still be cool with what I have devoted my life to."

I can honestly say I don't give a damn either way, how you guys address the question, I was simply trying to get an answer to it. You can keep on flaming each other and quoting then answering if you want to, I have read some interesting stuff, like neat definitions from Wikipedia, I likes learnin'. Or, you can stop all of that childish garbage and just answer the freakin' question. It wasn't my intention to make posters in here have to defend their faith, or lack there of.

I've said my peace, now back to my tinfoil hat with newly installed antenae.

Childish garbage? The question's been answered many times over. If you have a problem with the direction the thread is going then ask the mods to close it.

Anyway, how could morality arise via evolution, seeing as the primary distinction between man and animal is reason? Without Reason, how can one even decide to show empathy or morality? After all, animals run on instinct, no matter how "intelligent" they may be.

[Womble]

empathy is where our morals codes come from.

Is it? Or does empathy come from having internalized the moral codes upon which we are brought up, either by being taught or by imitation?

the fact that chimps and other animals can experience empathy no matter how primitive, to me implies that our basic morality arose via evolution.

To me it implies that humans love thinking about animals in anthropomorphic terms.

[Womble]

If you have a problem with the direction the thread is going then ask the mods to close it.

It'd be quite hypocritical of him to have a problem with the direction this thread is going after he explicitly invited the posters to "go ahead" in that direction in his opening post.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

empathy is where our morals codes come from

shouldn't it be the other way around? And, you call that particular part of chimp instinct empathy? I'll repeat what I posted earlier. Animals do not have reason. What they do cannot be considered empathy. because empathy is an act of concern and care, which requires reason and a soul. You cannot attribute human characteristics to animals. It just doesn't work that way.
the definition of empathy:
one's ability to recognize, perceive and feel directly the emotion of another. Since the states of mind, beliefs, and desires of others are intertwined with their emotions, one with empathy for another may often be able to more effectively define another's mode of thought and mood. Empathy is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes", or to in some way experience the outlook or emotions of another being within oneself, a sort of emotional resonance. Now you tell me if chimps can display empathy.

[shipper hannah]

Is it? Or does empathy come from having internalized the moral codes upon which we are brought up, either by being taught or by imitation?


To me it implies that humans love thinking about animals in anthropomorphic terms.

in fact i just noticed there's an article on how altruism might have evolved in this week's new scientist. it seems to nicely outline what i'm getting at!

[fluffypigeon]

I, personally, am incapable of arguing the complexities of religion or non-religion in the context of the stargate universe or my own for that matter. (Agnostic, atheist, I always get it messed up no matter how many times someone tries to explain it to me). But I did want to say that as one of those people who has been going to church nearly all her life, I'm just appreciative of the fact that the show allows for the possibility of God. Cam's little comments about his Grammaw's faith in God to which Landry says he also has a Grammaw? Well that just means to me that there is some plausibility in the writers minds that someone is behind the curtains, still running the show. We may not understand completely who or what that person is, how they fit into the universe, or why they do what they do, (and we may never know), but I guess that's the whole point isn't it? That's why it's called faith. It's the foundation of all religion. And thus it leaves me comforted that maybe I'm not meant to know it all.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

I'm glad because of that too, but it's definitely not meant to be any of the gods in various religions on Earth (especially not christianity) as the whole Stargate mythology has refuted most of them already, simply by its timeframe of the universe. Still, I just treat it as a show. Merely entertainment.

[fluffypigeon]

I'm glad because of that too, but it's definitely not meant to be any of the gods in various religions on Earth (especially not christianity) as the whole Stargate mythology has refuted most of them already, simply by its timeframe of the universe. Still, I just treat it as a show. Merely entertainment.

Agree completely.

[s09119]

That is a good place to start.

So far so good...

And you assume he would approve of your morales and ethics?
Why?

Becuase the ones I live by are the ones preached about in the Christian faith. Therefore he would have to admit that I lived, by his viewpoint, a moral life.

Have you?

Yes, hence the fact I said it...

Maybe he would condemn you because he has standards that you refused to meet?
Or that he designed people to function in a certain way that we are not functioning in?

I've lived my life the way a good Christian would/should; I try to do the right thing to help others, I respect and love my parents, I'm kind to my neighbors, I try not to swear, etc. I've met all his standards as far as I've seen.

So: "If God will not accept how I want things to be and what I want to be true and moral"

As I've said, I've lived my life as he supposedly asked his followers to. Can you honestly say he'd condemn me for it?

[Ltcolshepjumper]

So far so good...



Becuase the ones I live by are the ones preached about in the Christian faith. Therefore he would have to admit that I lived, by his viewpoint, a moral life.

Yes, hence the fact I said it...



I've lived my life the way a good Christian would/should; I try to do the right thing to help others, I respect and love my parents, I'm kind to my neighbors, I try not to swear, etc. I've met all his standards as far as I've seen.



As I've said, I've lived my life as he supposedly asked his followers to. Can you honestly say he'd condemn me for it?

I agree. In order for something to be moral, one has to have a basis or foundation for what morality is. If not, then everything a man does is right in his own eyes, refuting the need and justification of law and discipline. If murder is immoral in your eyes, but moral in another's, which one of you is right?

[s09119]

First, I am a christian. I'll state that openly right now. Those who affiliate themselves with a religion are not merely indoctrinated. They do not seek to merely cheat the end. That is the most ignorant statement I've read. Rather, it is those who refuse to listen to the beliefs of certain religions that are close-minded. For myself personally, I do not thnk of the universe as filled with billions of life scattered among the stars. There is a large difference between capable of sustaining life and actually having living organisms when it comes to Christianity, as we believe God Himself created life, and without Him, there is no life.

Tell me, how much do you know about theological debate, seeing that you by admittance don't even acknowledge any theology? I for one will listen to theological debate. I'd love to just sit down and debate with someone my beliefs.

Hey, I started off saying this wasn't typical of every Christian out there. But the vast majority I've met, or friends of mine have met, meet what I said exactly. They don't really follow their faith, and mostly believe out of fear of eternal nothingness when death comes.

That's my opinion, and I'm welcome to it. I, for one, can't see any reason to believe in God except to cheat death. But if you want to debate with me on it, let's go then. I'm really getting tired of Christians around here that just turn away and say "blasphemy" when I try to engage them in debate... :/

As for your second argument. You have missed the entire mark.

How...? It was my personal belief...?

One, we don't believe there are many worlds with life, so that question is refuted. Two, if we are an accident, and if there is no God, where is your basis for morality? What is the dividing line between good and evil? What is natural and unnatural? can you answer these questions? All of nature points to the existence of a divine creator. How else could something be produced from nothing, except it were supernatural?

I never said you believed in many worlds with life, I said that I did. Two, my basis for morality comes from what I learned as a child, really (which I freely admit was Christian-based. It's one thing that the Catholic church is good at, establishing solid morals), but I believe human morality comes from our evolution.

We were forced to rely on one another to survive as we advanced, and we had to work as one to get by. Animals and nature do this all the time, and we took it a step farther, showing real love and understanding for the problems of others. We realized that life is precious and should be respected, we found that honor and dignity made things go smoother and easier for all.

That's my opinion. And as for Creation... the Big Bang sounds just as credible to me as a magical being existing from nowhere himself creating it all, if not moreso.

[s09119]

I agree. In order for something to be moral, one has to have a basis or foundation for what morality is. If not, then everything a man does is right in his own eyes, refuting the need and justification of law and discipline. If murder is immoral in your eyes, but moral in another's, which one of you is right?

That's the problem. Technically, neither of us is right. It all depends on upbringing, culture, etc.

For example, murder is the highest atrocity and individual can commit in the Western world, next to rape. But in, for example, Wraith society, it is perfectly acceptable. Our morals are only seen as just and right because they're ours, nothing more.

[Ltcolshepjumper]

The entire concept of a divine creator answers most, ifnot all, of science's many questions.

How did the universe begin- God created the heavens (the universe) and the Earth.
How did life begin- God created the animals, each according to his own kind
How logical is evolution- not really logical, as there is no evidence that it actually happened. Just because diferent species share things in common doesn't mean they evolved from the same thing. It just proves that they are all from one planet, and have the necessary body parts for life and their environments.
Is death the end- According to religion, no. There is hope and life in some form after death. The spirit is eternal, the body is temporal.

And once again, I state that if there is no universal basis for morality, then the entire concept of law and justice, good and evil, right and wrong is utterly useless. How can you judge something based on personal opinion? There must be a basis for morality. Which is exactly why God must exist. Society would collapse if, as you say, morality is based upon individual interpretation.