PN wrote:I see God in nature. I suppose, the difference is what we are tuned in to. I am tuned into God's spirit. When I see a flower, I think of it's beautiful color, and the splendor of its beauty. This takes me to a verse where it tells us to not worry. If God clothes the flowers in such beauty, will he not meet our needs as well? So, I say a thank you to God, for his provisions in my life.
...
Why does science have to disprove God? Just because we know what makes a flower colorful, doesn't mean that God didn't create it to happen. There is beauty everywhere, and how do we know that someone doesn't see it? Some one dove down into the depths of the sea to experience it, correct? The beauty of the ocean, and the order there, is far more convincing of God's hand, than random chance.
...
He speaks to me through everyday things, situations, and people. Once I remember walking, and I asked God to give me a glimpse of how much he loves his people. I was so overwhelmed with love, but for a brief second, that I couldn't even breathe. It brought me to my knees.
HS wrote:Unlike you, I have been to the bottom of the sea, many, many times. The real point is that concepts such as "god" are just unnecessary noise in the system that prevents clear vision and thinking and that confusticate "truth" by providing simplistic answers thus obviating a complete understanding of nature's beauty and function. A detailed understanding of natural selection and evolutionary stable solutions are worth far more both in terms of usefulness and aesthetic appreciation than all the hosannas, hallelujahs, yea Gods, and hail Marys that have been served up since the beginning of time.
Peds nurse wrote:
You are obviously very intelligent H.S., and I gather a lover of science.
H.Sapiens wrote:I realize that you are a very nice person who is doing what comes naturally to you, but I do not need stroking, in fact, I find it somewhat distasteful in that it is, to my upbringing, rather personal and presumptuous.
I wasn't directly trying to "stroke" you, or insult you in anyway. I was making an observation.
PN wrote:
I am not undermining science, and the usefulness that gives to humanity.
H.Sapiens wrote:You may not realize it, it may not be intentional, but yes ... you undermine both science and the future of the human race. As long as people are told that there is a more powerful entity who can either destroy or fix at will, they will not grow up and understand and take full responsibility for their actions. We're way past our childhood's end.
I believe that you give credit, where it is not due. People don't take responsibility for actions, and most of the time, at least from my experience, it has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with pride.
Peds nurse wrote:
Spiritually however, it gives nothing, and that my friend is worth more than science can offer in a millennium.
H.Sapiens wrote:"Spirituality" is neither demonstrable nor demonstrably useful.
If you believe that to be true, then you have never seen a child die, for in them is the greatest hope. Hope is useful because it propels us to keep going...despite the ugly things that happen.
HS wrote:Besides, you've got it backward, there is no need to "disprove" God, in fact, it is quite impossible to prove a negative and thus it is absurd to attempt or suggest that it be done.
Peds nurse wrote:
I am going to be honest here, HS, and probably show my ineptness at debate (which I am sure is already known),
H.Sapiens wrote:If you don't understand the basic concepts of a debate what are you doing as a moderator on a site that is titled: "Debating Christianity and Religion?"
Excellent question! I suppose that my extreme love for the people on this forum, and my passion for civil dialogue, has been noticed. It certainly isn't because I debate well.
