Asking for a friend. Don’t show ass here
Can be, you can say nature is omnipresence, possible all knowing(on account that nature is everywhere and information can be stored various ways), eternal if you believe the universe has existed before time or whatever, and you could force all powerful but that could only be in the sense that nature would encompass all process that need power.
Nature could be like a god, but not like a supreme god that can create things at will and acts like a human.
No, they are different. One of them exists, and the other is fanfiction about the other.
You would trip over yourself responding to “does trump think he is god?” a question you already know the answer to. I ask one of the most important questions in philosophy and you feel you understand it implicitly by being an atheist. The question is quite atheistic.
You asked a question about a belief and got an answer about somebody’s belief. And what did you do? You felt the need to swat down that answer because what? You think it wasn’t good enough? That’s garbage man.
The question wasn’t answered.
You got an answer, you just didn’t like it.
The question was answered. You just asked a narrow-scoped yes or no question (with the expectation that people would read your mind and somehow know you wanted to know “why” as well). That is your fault, not theirs.
No, actually, I didn’t expect any of you to know what nature or god is. I knew you would show your ass. That’s why I said “don’t show ass”.
The only ass showing seems to be coming from you. But I expect you won’t understand that at all.
Peace out dog. ✌️
Moving on from something you don’t understand was always an option. This isn’t an airport. Showing the question being mistaken for another reveals the difference between the questions. What’s wrong, your ego? It was never there in the first place.
I always thought that if God exists, then God must be practically indistinguishable from science, as far as we’re concerned.
Because you can’t tell me that any practically omnipotent being with a 50,000 IQ would deliberately choose to personally micromanage every cubic nanometer of the entire universe for every single Planck time of the duration of the entire universe that they’re creating.
There’s no way that they would!
As the old saying goes: Work smarter, not harder. This entity is going to create a series of clockwork laws for the universe to run by (physics), and then they’re going to let set laws do their thing, and then they’re going to stay out of the way.
Ergo, to me God and science would be (for all practical purposes) indistinguishable from each other if God exists, just based on how the universe would be started in the first place.
Don’t show ass here
Okay OP, what’s the answer you want?
That’s clearly a tame donkey, not a wild ass, SMH.
/s
I believe this idea is called pantheism and many religions can be considered pantheistic including Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism as well as Oppenheimer and Einstein.
The definition of god is much too flexible.
There are so many acceptions of the word “god” that a straight answer is impossible. I’ve come to hear “god” as “nature” personally, encompassing all creation. The rest is just semantics. Some religious folk however exercise anthropomorphism by assuming god is or has a will resembling that of a human being’s. Knowing what I know about the universe, stars, galaxies, black holes, quantum mechanics, etc. such a premise seems exceedingly naive.
Well I can’t ask either so I will spend the rest of my life pondering and observing. Like those people called scientist. I think in some ways we all are scared to die but some are in so much pain they wish for it. Ain’t that some shit.
Depends on the religion. A pantheist might say yes
Ragebaiting people with Spinoza might be my finest work yet
Hegel next hold on to those pants
Natural titties are god, sure. Ass is more the devil’s door I think
No. God is a crazy person hallucinating.
The existence of the divine is unfalsifiable, so it cannot be rationally proven or disproven. Still, something may exist even if it cannot be proven. Some classical arguments do not prove God outright, but may make the existence of a creator slightly more probable than not. The strongest of these is the cosmological argument: since the universe appears not to be eternal, it suggests a cause or creator beyond it. If such a creator exists, then the creator is not identical to what is created. Therefore, nature is not God.
It depends who you ask and what religion you are talking about. In pagan religions and practices like shamanism and Shinto which I believe is still the major religion of Japan, nature is treated as divine. In Buddhism and similar religions anything and everything is god, manifesting themselves through the universe, you are god too, the universe experiencing itself. In other religions such as Catholicism, nature is a creation of god, so while not divine it should still garner respect for being god’s creation. Some believe that it’s all there for them to use, that god put everything on this earth for us and those are total assholes
I think that’s kind of the short answer I’m sure someone else will have a better one lol
When you’re on a mountain, an empty beach, a forest, etc., you certainly feel the presence of something bigger than yourself. Is that god? I think so. I think John Denver agreed. Not a religious scholar, but he had something with Rocky Mountain High. You can talk to god and listen for his casual reply.
It might be or might not. It is very subjective.
One thing for sure: nature IS.
It doesn’t care if you think anything.
It doesn’t plan.
And it doesn’t play favorites.Time marches forward and things are, then they don’t, then something else becomes of them and they are afterwards but sometimes nothing needs to come out of it either.
Tho I am not sure about the time part.
One thing for sure: nature IS.
👆 Yes, exactly, but it also wasn’t.
- It doesn’t care if you think anything.
- It doesn’t plan.
- And it doesn’t play favorites.
The question is confusing, it doesn’t imply god has a personality. Plucked out of context to see if anyone is about it. In its time, it was controversial for its atheism. Now it sounds completely different to people. I hope I can be forgiven for my deceitful ways
Who says nature wasn’t?
Who say there is a wasn’t for nature and it is not in its nature to be or not?I was lying again, I did warn this time tho. Nature is the infinite uncreated which precedes stuff. Does that qualify as godhood to you?
Gods are created by humans, therefore nature isn’t god.
How can we call something god that exist and unexist at the same time? How can be a non sentiment non-being be a god?Not a god like Zeus. I’ll just do a proper write up on it when I finish a few more books. Was looking for study buddies ^^
Zeus is exactly just like the other gods: Jupiter, Ra, Krishna, Anaterasu, Enkidu, Coyote and Jesus - or even the ‘fictional ones’ like Cthulhu.
If it was written by a human in a human language that’s a human construct.
If god exists it would be written in a gods penmanship and we would not be able to read it. Because the ink would be galaxies on a tapestry of incomphensive amount of space and time. Who knows maybe they are still signing their names after creating everything for a kindergarten homework assignment.We are all students in this life ;)
Dawg that is simply not what God means in this question. I failed to communicate with anyone in this thread. We’ll come back to this later after I pass this quarter, literally. I currently have literally 120% in my classes so consider yourselves all due for more confusion.
Ah well, I don’t know what I expected. Spinoza could have been ripped apart in the streets for articulating this correctly.
