Lest we forget

[TomOfSweden]

I don't see how if I say that everything is possible, I give the same validity to everything. I don't see why I can't have the hierarchy I have of belief and reality, that is that I see some things as more likely than others.

Ok, sorry. That's what I'm getting at. I thaught you had a number of theories, (like the christian one) that you judged on equal merit. I guess not. I agree to some extent. It's just that in this hierarchy of plausible theories, for me I only put reasonable theories on it. Christianity just isn't...again, because it has no suporting evidence what so ever.

As for Christianity, I was raised Catholic, which means I know a lot about different religious rituals and not a lot of actual theology (since I stopped being interested in junior high, and then started being interested in non-Christian religions after that). I will say this: I think a lot of Christians are way too literal. I think religions are meant to be applied to the spiritual side of the world, not the physical side of the world: that is, any language relating to the physical world should be taken metaphorically and not literally. For example, the 7 days of Creation. A lot of Christians and atheists (and some agnostics) seem caught up on this seven day thing. Why? I don't get it. The Christians should be thinking about it in spiritual terms not physical reality and the atheists shouldn't care. Of course, the reason they care is that the Christians start making all kinds of stupid claims about the physical world. I agree that religion should not start trying to tell science what to do: for me, they operate in different areas of reality and expertise.

Now, obviously, Christianity also conflicts with my own basic belief that no religion is the only right one. Because *that* is an area that leaves for a lot less wiggle room. But Christianity does exist. So, I believe that reality does exist for someone. I just really hope it doesn't then apply to me. And more importantly, I really hope that it doesn't apply to people who've never heard of Christianity. Those are the people I really think would be unjustly harmed if it's true, and it's mainly because of them that I could never be Christian again.

Ok, so let's say the Bible is only metaphores. If we accept this then it isn't really saying anything is it? Since the whole nature of metaphores is that they are open to interpretation. And if it isn't saying anything then what? Is it even a religion? Is it anything at all. If there's no way of distinguishing fact from metaphor in the Bible then Christianity is just nothing but pretty words?

Now, as for the other end: I never asked you to believe in an immortal soul. In fact, I didn't ask you why you didn't believe in one. I asked you why you believed the theory was impossible -- not just improbable. Improbable, I can deal with, but impossible?

You don't live in constant fear from sinking through the ground each time your out for a walk. You don't look under the bed for monsters each time you go to the toilet at night. It's all for very good reasons. Both these scenarios could in the right setting be possible but they are highly improbable. See what I'm getting at? Who cares what's impossible? Anything is possible. Anything. It's impossible to function as a human being if we keep every avenue open. That's off-course why religious people just pick one religion and stick to it, completly ignoring that all other religions use exactly the same, (false) argumentation for it's validity.

Finally, dimensions. Yes. I don't believe in the supernatural. I believe the universe itself is sentient, i.e. everything in it, including rocks, trees, etc. That is, I think our sentience is linked to our life. So, if all the people closed their eyes, first of all, some of us would be dreaming or imagining things in our heads.... second of all, if we all disappeared, there would still be plants and animals and stars. I think their sentience is so different from ours that it's impossible to communicate with them or know how they communicate with the scientific tools of today. So, until nothing exists, something will exist. But yes, I believe it's all natural, not supernatural. And I believe nothing is something, so I think something will always exist, even if it's nothing.

Ahhh....now I get it. Nothing wrong with that theory. It's just that when you where talking about spirits and dieties I got worried. I asumed that when you said comunicate you meant talking. My fault. Sorry.

I don't believe things can be destroyed, only transformed.

I'm not going to argue that one since Einstein proved it a hundred years ago. Messing with that guy requires guts.

And I'm interested in science agreeing, since I don't know how scientists can perform an experiment without having some idea of what they're expecting. That is, they may not have seen it with their physical eyes, but they've read about it or heard evidence from others who've seen it, or something. They know about it, or there wouldn't be a way of studying it. Again, as soon as someone has an idea, it exists as an idea in someone's head. And without an idea, where does the research come from? How can a scientist really test whether something exists that *no one* has thought of without someone thinking of something and thus rendering that "something" invalid?

Yeah, I know I love it. Where do ideas come from? It's such a fascinating subject. I'm going with the meme theory until a better one turns up.