The God Who Is Boud By Emotion And Mistakes

I point to the sand on the beach, the animals hiding by the rocks, at the flowing water of rivers and the dew of the earth... I point to the stars of the sky, and the light of the world... This is God. This is nature. This is real.
 
Reiku said:
I point to the sand on the beach, the animals hiding by the rocks, at the flowing water of rivers and the dew of the earth... I point to the stars of the sky, and the light of the world... This is God. This is nature. This is real.
Click to expand...
Yes those things are real, but are they god? What religion worships god as nature? Why would nature need a god? god can be left out of the equation and nature stands alone just fine.
 
The Bible often, in Isaiah speak of Jehovah commanding the birds of the air and the fish of the sea... So why then is He not a coordinator of nature itself... indeed, why Not be nature itself?
 
Reiku said:
The Bible often, in Isaiah speak of Jehovah commanding the birds of the air and the fish of the sea... So why then is He not a coordinator of nature itself... indeed, why Not be nature itself?
Click to expand...

Because your bible, with all of its falsehoods and contridictions is too por of a source to take seriously. The process of applying logic rules out god.
 
spidergoat said:
It's more likely that the nature of our awareness as living beings with a nervous system is being projected onto the nature of the universe. Are crystals aware when they reproduce themselves? No. Even at the level of the genes which make us, it's only a mechanical process. Using people as a model of the universe is arbitrary and inaccurate.
Click to expand...

You were stating that if there is a God there must now be two complex things. I was pointing out that this was not necessarily so.

Are you so sure all life forms with consciousness will be like us in structure?
 
snake river rufus said:
I was not trying to pick on you, I seem to recall your beliefs. I just think it's a good question to ask those who claim to see design in nature.
Click to expand...
I do see design in nature but from there I don't get to a 'who'. I am not very interested in proofs of God. These days, what with Neuroscience and deterministic physics we'd be lucky to convince anyone we had a self with logic. However hard and passionately these other selves seem to be arguing that neither they nor I 'really' exist.
 
snake river rufus said:
Yes, design of nature by natural selection.
Click to expand...
And so I wonder why any scientists would ever use the word 'design' in any context. Given that we are a part of nature and subject to the same (apparently) random stimuli that set of causal chains. The word design implies choice and outside vantage. Hard science - I keep being told - indicates that neither of these are true. The only vantage is somewhere within chains of domino like causal bumps and choice is an illusion.

Should we not then ban the use of the word design and simply rely on pattern.
 
Snake

''Yes, design of nature by natural selection.''

And it is by natural selection God has designed.
 
Grantywanty said:
And so I wonder why any scientists would ever use the word 'design' in any context. Given that we are a part of nature and subject to the same (apparently) random stimuli that set of causal chains. The word design implies choice and outside vantage. Hard science - I keep being told - indicates that neither of these are true. The only vantage is somewhere within chains of domino like causal bumps and choice is an illusion.

Should we not then ban the use of the word design and simply rely on pattern.
Click to expand...

Do we choose our mates?
I normally use the word 'design' to annoy creationists.
 
snake river rufus said:
Do we choose our mates?
I normally use the word 'design' to annoy creationists.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you don't use design. But it is used, obviously, by many people other than creationists. Designers of all kinds. Mechanical design. Designing buildings. What was her design on him? It had a nice design.

All these claims to choice and agency. To a vantage outside of the causal chains.

Things just happen. We can only watch the determinist unfolding of the universe. Nothing designs. It just happens. One domino does not design the next. One neurotransmitter does not design the reaction at the next never cell.

Yet despite the ubiquity of the use of the word design for some reason most people think only the creationists have a religious belief when it comes to design.
 
Well, I'll say it again. I see no reason to assume God never made mistakes. We could have developing God who has made mistakes along the way. Some rather large. Belief in God should not be hinged to infallibility.

Yes, the monotheists have a messy set of axioms to work with.
 
There are (i think) three verses in the Bible, stating that God is Jealous...
Click to expand...

There's actually 15, (self proclaimed jealousy), and several other human statements that this god is jealous.
 
Grantywanty said:
Perhaps you don't use design. But it is used, obviously, by many people other than creationists. Designers of all kinds. Mechanical design. Designing buildings. What was her design on him? It had a nice design.

All these claims to choice and agency. To a vantage outside of the causal chains.

Things just happen. We can only watch the determinist unfolding of the universe. Nothing designs. It just happens. One domino does not design the next. One neurotransmitter does not design the reaction at the next never cell.

Yet despite the ubiquity of the use of the word design for some reason most people think only the creationists have a religious belief when it comes to design.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, engineer here. 30 years in aerospace. I'm not at all comfortable with the no design/things just happen school of thought. It would make building a 767 a little hard, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top