RE: Why are the religious so sensitive?
September 22, 2008 at 7:00 am
(This post was last modified: September 22, 2008 at 7:09 am by Edwardo Piet.)
Anything supernatural almost certainly doesn't exist because there is no evidence for it and lots of evidence against it....So why pick some supernatural things over others if they are all equally unlikely?
Its even possible that if some supernatural things are more likely to exist than others it will be an incredibly simple unintelligent robotic supernatural being (or even object) that is most likely to exist out of the supernatural possibilites...and all religions (that I know of) make much more complicated and unlikely claims than this example of simplicity, and if God was this simple and he simply let the universe grow without any decison on his part because he's not even conscious....thats not really supernatural or even God at all really is it?
And I think even an incredibly simple robot with no mind is very improbable....the root of the universe probably has to be something even more simple most likely maybe something simpler than you can possibly imagine that merly triggers the inflation of the big 'Bang'. Or maybe the universe has always existed which is far more likely than the idea that God has always existed because the idea of God is so much more complicated than the universe was early on, especially considering God is not just supposed to exist but also supposed to have the power to CREATE the universe!
Anyway my conclusion is that IF I made up my own religion and I had strong faith in it, it would be just as important and valid to me and just as likely as the other religions are....so the idea that saying anything against religion in anyway or that merely doubting it is insensitive, is most likely simply due to the ancient sacred history of religion rather than religion itself...because my idea of a new religion IF i had faith in it or believed it in anyway for example would get less support. My religion would seem absurd even though the 'real' religions of today are just as absurd, because my hypothetical religion doesn't have an ancient sacred history.
Its even possible that if some supernatural things are more likely to exist than others it will be an incredibly simple unintelligent robotic supernatural being (or even object) that is most likely to exist out of the supernatural possibilites...and all religions (that I know of) make much more complicated and unlikely claims than this example of simplicity, and if God was this simple and he simply let the universe grow without any decison on his part because he's not even conscious....thats not really supernatural or even God at all really is it?
And I think even an incredibly simple robot with no mind is very improbable....the root of the universe probably has to be something even more simple most likely maybe something simpler than you can possibly imagine that merly triggers the inflation of the big 'Bang'. Or maybe the universe has always existed which is far more likely than the idea that God has always existed because the idea of God is so much more complicated than the universe was early on, especially considering God is not just supposed to exist but also supposed to have the power to CREATE the universe!
Anyway my conclusion is that IF I made up my own religion and I had strong faith in it, it would be just as important and valid to me and just as likely as the other religions are....so the idea that saying anything against religion in anyway or that merely doubting it is insensitive, is most likely simply due to the ancient sacred history of religion rather than religion itself...because my idea of a new religion IF i had faith in it or believed it in anyway for example would get less support. My religion would seem absurd even though the 'real' religions of today are just as absurd, because my hypothetical religion doesn't have an ancient sacred history.
