> >But the deep question is why there is something rather than nothing, not
> how
> >long this state of affairs has been happening, the existence of time after
> >all is just another thing that needs to be explained. If religion could do
> >even a little bit better than science in explaining this, if it could just
> >give me a hint of why there hasn't always not been a God then I'd be a
> >religious man. It can't so I'm not.
>
> If you think like this, you`ll never be religious. Religion is connected
> with believe not with explanations. Either you can believe, or you can`t.
> There won`t ever be an explanation in a real religion.
> BTW I`m no christian or other conventional religion.
>
>
Its actually a pretty pathetic religion that does not explain anything. Keep in
mind that religion formed as an organized class to maintain knowledge of a
social groups history, mythology, and intellectual property. In its time,
successfull religions explained everything sufficiently for the man of the
time. That science has surpassed religion in its ability to explain the
universe in a more consistent manner that is congruent with observed fact is an
indication that most of mankind has or is moving beyond religion as the major
means of explaining the universe. This is extropic to say the least. This is
not to say that any religion, in its original form, was not extropic for the
time in which it was formed. Organized structures like religions do, however,
become obsolescent with time if they cannot change sufficiently to meet the
changing times.
Any religion which cannot explain anything to the satisfaction of even a small
group of people is nothing more than either a dead mythology or a quaint form
of meditative exercise.
Mike Lorrey