Is God Nature?

[Guest end3]

Just pondering the relationship between people "in" Christ and seeds needing to be "planted" to grow, seeing that some here attribute nature, to, or as God.

 

Edited for the parochial biatch: The relationship to people living/growing "in Christ" is analogous to planting a seed in the soil.....so some say nature is God. So how is my view untruthful if it is analogous to yours?

 

This takes me to Florduh's question of how did it all come about...paraphasing poorly here....where did the concept of "god" come from? What put this in people's heads? And if many aspects are similar, how do we know we are not talking about a one god from where all others evolved. Just a random thought.

 

And let's take medicine. Just because some have an adverse reaction, does this mean the medicine is not real or effective.

 

there biatch...(Legion)

[Legion]

End I think these lazy OP’s are bad. Okay? We don’t read minds. I can’t tell from what you’ve said here what you are driving at.

[par4dcourse]

End I think these lazy OP’s are bad. Okay? We don’t read minds. I can’t tell from what you’ve said here what you are driving at.

I don't understand the question either. The only thing seeds and people have in common is that we both eventually end up underground.

[Munk]

"Biatch"? Seriously?! Roflwaffles I've never heard THAT one before

 

Also, the whole nature = god thing? Pantheism? That's the pagan's sphere, so hop out of it lest you forget that your god is purported to be up, apart, and separate from nature.

[Spiderwire]

I don't understand where you're going with this one either, end. You're getting sloppy.

 

Tell us what you want us to discuss. Be plain. You can be elusive or cryptic in your responses, but give us a topic that everyone can get onboard with and we'll be more than happy to rip it to shreds.

[Deva]

End3, you self-confessed troll, what are you trying to ask? Am I to understand that you believe that people are living/growing "in Christ"? If so, that view might indeed be "truthful" to your own mind, but you know very well it doesn't fly here.

 

Then you jump into a completely different question - "where did the concept of God come from?" How do these two separate matters relate?

[hereticzero]

Gaia is her name. http://www.paleothea.com/sortasingles/gaia.html

[florduh]

I think he and Anders need to have a debate.

 

I'll bring the popcorn.

[babysealclubber]

And if many aspects are similar, how do we know we are not talking about a one god from where all others evolved.

 

I have considered this position.

 

The problem that I have with it is that the gods don't seem to have much in common. Is it possible that in the African "primordial soup" of man that an idea of a god arose, and then evolved into all the different concepts of god that we see today? I don't know. It doesn't make the idea of a god or gods true, but is interesting.

 

I'm no expert on the history of religions though. It could be that the idea of god arose spontaneously in different areas and time periods, which would make the concept somewhat invalid. But we do have evidence that religious evolution exists, it's happened throughout history.

 

The origin of religion I suppose would be analogous to abiogenesis, plenty of theories as to how it arose, but no real proof. But that's an assumption on my part, I'm not well read on the subject. I imagine a good book to read would be one about memes.

[florduh]

God, like the ideal sex partner, is whatever you define it to be because neither one actually exists.

[chefranden]

Just pondering the relationship between people "in" Christ and seeds needing to be "planted" to grow, seeing that some here attribute nature, to, or as God.

 

Edited for the parochial biatch: The relationship to people living/growing "in Christ" is analogous to planting a seed in the soil.....so some say nature is God. So how is my view untruthful if it is analogous to yours?

 

This takes me to Florduh's question of how did it all come about...paraphasing poorly here....where did the concept of "god" come from? What put this in people's heads? And if many aspects are similar, how do we know we are not talking about a one god from where all others evolved. Just a random thought.

 

And let's take medicine. Just because some have an adverse reaction, does this mean the medicine is not real or effective.

 

Analogies are not equivalencies. For example if I said, "The truck was as big as a whale," it would not follow that the truck was a whale -- don't you see.

 

People think of ideas. That is one thing some human brains can do. Some people can't do it or perhaps don't do it because they are told not to. Other people get ideas because they are told not to. Your church started because the Campbells got the idea that the Presbyterian church was wrong. And the Presbyterians got started because they got the idea that the Church of England was wrong, and the Church of England got started because Henry the Eighth got the idea that he wanted another wife, and the Catholic Church got started when Constantine got the idea of a new religion to unite his empire. Paul started his churches when he got the idea that Peter's church was wrong, Peter's church got started out of his guru's idea the Jews were wrong, The Jews got started when Isaiah got the idea that only his invisible god was real. Where the rest of the invisible gods came from I don't know enough to say. Nevertheless, I think they all started as an idea in someone's brain.

 

Here is a cool theory: God comes from the two halves of the human brain. That is the left half thinking that orders from the right half are from the exterior because it is not aware of the connection. see Bicameralism

[Rhia]

I agree with the other posters - you haven't made yourself very clear.

 

Please clarify the OP, without the assumptions that you are right and the rest of us have IQs below 80. I THINK I understand where you're coming from, but want to be certain before I give you an answer that you're just going to shoot down anyway.

[Guest end3]

Analogies are not equivalencies. For example if I said, "The truck was as big as a whale," it would not follow that the truck was a whale -- don't you see.

 

But they are both big...and yes, in the case of the planting of seeds for their growth process and the "planting" of people in Christ for their Spiritual maturation, they have the same function, to grow. I realize one is a plant and one is spiritual, but why is there not an effective training method outside of God, that serves the same purpose....emphasis on effective. Education alone doesn't seem to completely fit the ticket. Nature alone? So was the initial principle of God from God? Seems like some weird stuff to come out of nowhere... I realize also that people make stuff up for things they don't understand, but we understand much more than did our ancestors, so why does God still exist. Should we be identifying the functions rather than the entity?

 

I apologize for the abstract ramblings

 

Here is a cool theory: God comes from the two halves of the human brain. That is the left half thinking that orders from the right half are from the exterior because it is not aware of the connection. see Bicameralism

 

I remember watching the video you posted about the lady that had the stroke. That was a great video, but if memory serves me correctly, she believed there was more to life than the body, did she not?

 

Thanks Babysealclubber, that was a good answer.

[Spiderwire]

Analogies are not equivalencies. For example if I said, "The truck was as big as a whale," it would not follow that the truck was a whale -- don't you see.

 

But they are both big...

 

Ah, yes, they are! In comparison to a pair of roller skates and a pocket knife. They are huge and immense in respects to those items. But comparatively speaking, a truck and a whale are minuscule next to a Montana-class battleship, which in turn is minuscule next to the continent of Africa, which is minuscule next to the planet Jupiter and I could go on and on. You may have a desire to twist what chefranden had to say and make it look unimportant, but the fact is that you are forced to deal with your own analogies... and your current one makes no sense.

 

What, exactly, is the "planting" of people in Christ for their spiritual maturation supposed to mean? What is spiritual maturation? How does one know they have achieved it? The Bible will tell you that only at death does a person reach their "fullness". So, no matter what the course of action is as a Christian, it's an unattainable goal. How does it make you feel, slogging around every single day in the quest for spiritual maturation, to know you'll never make it? Is this the training method of which you speak? Education has little to nothing (and I lean more toward nothing) to do with spiritual maturation. Isn't education a stumbling block to spirituality? You speak of nature as if we are able to learn some kind of spiritual truths from it. I can't make a tree, this is certain. But I also can't learn anything from it other than to study it's structure and function. We can experience it in a spiritual way, but there is no spirituality offered by nature itself.

 

What it sounds like you're asking is if it's possible that man, out of nowhere, came up with the concept of God or a god or gods. If that question is really bothering you, you'd better get on your knees and get busy bowing before Isis, Brahma, Krishna, Diana, Minerva, Helios, Osiris, and the thousands of other gods that, to many people before you (and some today?), were as real to them as your Yeshua is to you. I think you'd be hard pressed to admit that any of those gods or goddesses actually existed, and your response - to the negative - would probably follow a loud chuckle. So why is it that you feel YOUR god is special? That YOUR god is REAL? That YOUR god gave birth to the thought of himself?

 

You make mention that we know now so much more than our ancestors. Your question is that, since this is true (and it is), why does God still exist. You should really ask why the THOUGHT or the CONCEPT of god still exists. Take a look in the mirror and view your own religious superstition and the things that have been drummed into your mind since you were a child and reach for a level of rote intelligence that will adequately serve to answer your own question.

[Guest end3]

and your current one makes no sense.

'

 

makes sense to me, people look to Christianity all the time to let God change their lives in a, what I would define as more mature, meaningful way.

 

What, exactly, is the "planting" of people in Christ for their spiritual maturation supposed to mean?

 

Acknowlegement of Christ, and belief thereof.

 

 

What is spiritual maturation? How does one know they have achieved it?

 

good question, I feel sure I have not achieved it, and don't know that I will until I die. Does anyone have all the answers??

 

Is this the training method of which you speak?

 

yes

 

 

Education has little to nothing (and I lean more toward nothing) to do with spiritual maturation.

 

NOT AS PERPORTED BY ALMOST EVERYONE HERE SPIDER!

 

Isn't education a stumbling block to spirituality?

 

Why should it be

 

You speak of nature as if we are able to learn some kind of spiritual truths from it. I can't make a tree, this is certain. But I also can't learn anything from it other than to study it's structure and function. We can experience it in a spiritual way, but there is no spirituality offered by nature itself.

 

?????? You may be very alone in your thinking here.

 

 

What it sounds like you're asking is if it's possible that man, out of nowhere, came up with the concept of God or a god or gods.

 

No, I am asking if we know where the god concept, as you correctly stated, originated.

 

You make mention that we know now so much more than our ancestors. Your question is that, since this is true (and it is), why does God still exist. You should really ask why the THOUGHT or the CONCEPT of god still exists. Take a look in the mirror and view your own religious superstition and the things that have been drummed into your mind since you were a child and reach for a level of rote intelligence that will adequately serve to answer your own question.

 

 

So you think faith was imployed as a hugh scam on people?

[Ouroboros]

Just pondering the relationship between people "in" Christ and seeds needing to be "planted" to grow, seeing that some here attribute nature, to, or as God.

This makes me think of how the early religious beliefs came about. There's plenty of evidence (in archeology ) that shows that the earlier forms of belief came from how the seeds die in the earth, and then are "reborn" into the plants. This concept is much older than Christianity. And it's the reason to why several old pagan religions had a specific god for harvest. It make makes me wonder if the ankh (life) symbol from Egypt might be the symbol of a flower/plant seedling?

 

Edited for the parochial biatch: The relationship to people living/growing "in Christ" is analogous to planting a seed in the soil.....so some say nature is God. So how is my view untruthful if it is analogous to yours?

 

This takes me to Florduh's question of how did it all come about...paraphasing poorly here....where did the concept of "god" come from? What put this in people's heads? And if many aspects are similar, how do we know we are not talking about a one god from where all others evolved. Just a random thought.

Like I said above, there's a lot of evidence that the modern religions evolved from earlier natural religions. Astrology existed long time before the Judaic belief, which I think even the Bible admits (Ur, which Abraham came out of, I think was a center for astrology and other kind of faiths). I also think there's plenty of evidence to show that the Sumerians where star and sun worshipers. So you're absolutely right. The beliefs many have today came from earlier religious beliefs, but unfortunately not "1 God=Jesus God" is not it, but something completely different.

 

Think about this. When does the Bible really make clear when Israel and Judaism became a religion and a people? Was it with Moses? If the Christians maintain that Moses wrote the first books of the Bible, that means no one had a "holy book" for the "one and single god religion" before that. Now, who and what kind of religious people, cultures, and cities existed before Moses according to the Bible? Plenty of other kinds of cultures and beliefs. The Egyptian religion existed before Moses, according to the Bible. So if a person maintains the Bible is true, well, then other beliefs must have pre-existed the Judeo/Christian belief. It's very simple.

[Spiderwire]

Okay. I'll play. I'll regret it, but I'll play.

 

makes sense to me, people look to Christianity all the time to let God change their lives in a, what I would define as more mature, meaningful way.

Fair enough. Would you agree that an individual can discover Amway and, through their personal dedication and hard work, the company and their efforts for the company could change their lives and allow them - in their mind - to live in a more mature and meaningful way? I've seen people's lives changed radically and for the better by enlisting in the United States Army. It changed mine! You specifically mentioned Christianity, but aren't Mormonism or Islam just as life altering for those who follow it? How are they, as opposed to the Christian, not experiencing a mature, meaningful way? I will wager that you believe they are not. So, in what you're saying, only by looking to Christianity and the god of Christianity can a person's life be changed in what you would describe as a mature, meaningful way. Is this correct?

 

Does anyone have all the answers??

I would have to say no. No one has all the answers. But does the Christian Bible or the Christian religion have all the answers? Before you say "no", I would ask that you consider the fact that one claims to have all the answers and the other claims to follow what has all the answers.

 

Education has little to nothing (and I lean more toward nothing) to do with spiritual maturation.

 

NOT AS PERPORTED BY ALMOST EVERYONE HERE SPIDER!

I bow for no god and I certainly bow for no human. To say that my opinion may or may not be supported by members of the forum is to try to back me into the same corner you are in with your religion. I have no church, no scriptures, and no fellow man to answer to in the areas of my thoughts and opinions. I stand by my statement.

 

Isn't education a stumbling block to spirituality?

Why should it be

I don't know. Should it be? What does Romans, chapter one have to say about the whole issue?

 

You speak of nature as if we are able to learn some kind of spiritual truths from it. I can't make a tree, this is certain. But I also can't learn anything from it other than to study it's structure and function. We can experience it in a spiritual way, but there is no spirituality offered by nature itself.

?????? You may be very alone in your thinking here.

And once again, I don't give a shit if anyone here agrees with my statement or not. I'm not sitting in a pew. I think what I want to think and those are my thoughts. You asked the question. I countered it. What part of nature brings me spiritual enlightenment? What part of nature gives me spiritual teaching and knowledge? Again, I can experience nature in a very spiritual manner. And again, what spiritual truth am I to gain from nature itself? That may be a question I have answered in time, but if I were to see truth in the answer, I would accept it rather than seek to discount it because a book and a religious tradition say otherwise. Before you seek to instill some kind of fear in me as to what my fellow forum members will think or say about my thoughts, consider the very nature of this forum. You're in unfamiliar territory... not I.

 

No, I am asking if we know where the god concept, as you correctly stated, originated.

I shall be more direct than my last paragraph, then. It originated in the mind of superstitious man. That's where it has lived since and that's where it continues to live - and thrive - today. A cursory examination of ancient and modern world religions should lead you to that conclusion rather quickly. However, if you're firmly entrenched in the mind-boggling miasma that is Christianity, it will be very difficult to arrive at that conclusion. It took me seven years to even consider it and another three to realize that it's the truth. No matter how much I didn't want it to be, I might add. So, I'm willing to be patient with you.

 

So you think faith was imployed as a hugh scam on people?

No, I don't believe that. I think faith was employed to give people a sense of well-being. I think the concept of faith was developed to give people who lived in a very cruel world a better quality of life in thinking that, one day, everything would be much better. When it became obvious that nothing was getting any better, it became much easier to believe that things would be much better in the next life. It would be natural to hope and think that a deceased loved one is in a better place if for nothing else than the hope that, one day, you would find yourself in such a place... a wonderful place so unlike the cruel planet we inhabit - especially in ancient times. Yes, I believe that faith and the concept of it began innocently enough and provided much comfort to people who were suffering.

 

Do I believe that men arose who would seek to rule people by using that faith against them? Do I believe that men became makers of laws and implementors of rules in order to manipulate the faith of others so that they would be silent under their oppression? Do I believe that men would use the fear of threatening someone with their faith in order to see them conform? Do I believe that men would stand before others and declare what they knew was a lie in order to further their own comfort and position and to ensure their way of life continued? Do I believe that men would gleefully count the riches that had been compiled purely from the guilt and fear of those who had faith? Oh, yes!!! I do believe that! I believe that with all of my heart!

[chefranden]

1. I realize one is a plant and one is spiritual, but why is there not an effective training method outside of God, that serves the same purpose....emphasis on effective. 2. we understand much more than did our ancestors, so why does God still exist. 3 Should we be identifying the functions rather than the entity?

 

1. Training for what? I'm getting pretty good with Corel Painter, but I'm not getting any training from the church.

 

But really what is a Christian in training for? I thought heaven was a nice place, streets of gold, milk and honey (personally I don't like milk and honey I'd rather have chocolate milk), free harps, a nice house. I could see it if y'all were training to play the harp. Certainly schools are mostly no good at harp training. From my experience 90% of pew sitters can't croak an in tune note to save their soul let alone play a harp. No I don't think that churches are effective training centers.

 

2. I understand more than our ancestors, therefore God does not exist. You don't understand more than your ancestors, and maybe even less because you still believe in God.

3. If you like. After all you are the only one that knows what you mean here.

 

I remember watching the video you posted about the lady that had the stroke. That was a great video, but if memory serves me correctly, she believed there was more to life than the body, did she not?

 

She may have, I don't remember. She was a trained observer of her dying brain. She retrieved a lot more from the experience then I would have. But things one sees with abnormal brain function are not necessarily so. Once, stoned on acid I saw a corner store get up on pigs feet and run away. I saw it plain as day, but the only thing real about it was my brain cells trying to spit out the poison I gave them.

[Amethyst]

End3, I do think that would be anthithetical to your religion since Jesus is supposed to be god, not nature.

 

What you describe would be Panentheism or Pantheism or some variant thereof.

 

The concept of god likely came about from people sitting around a campfire thousands of years ago telling stories because they had nothing better to do for entertainment back then. We have comic books. They had superhero-type beings who lived in the sky, I don't see much of a difference except we know comic books aren't real.

[JernJane]

When I was a Christian, the idea was quite different. It was speaking about the gospel, witnessing for Christ or whatever that was planting the seed, and not living in Christ. Living in Christ was when the seed had either fallen into good soil or one of the other options where people started out believing, but might fall away later.

 

Also, medicine has a clear impact on people. It has different impacts on different people, but it is physical. Medicine does, however, not claim to heal everyone who wants it to. It gives you "expected effect" and is joined by a list of possible side-effects. It also gets more complicated the more complicated the disease/illness is that one is trying to cure with the medicine and how long the medicine has been in use etc.

 

There are countless differences between scientific medicine and asking god to heal you:

 

1: God is (in the Christian faith, which you represent) an agent with a will, who makes promises and seems unable or unwilling to keep them. Medicine makes no promises, but tells you of its expected effects, possible side-effects and to contact your doctor if you experience something unusual.

 

2: God's "healings" happen rather rarely. Medicine cures people all the time. Western medicine has eradicated polio, has a vaxine for measles etc. Its list of merits is very, very long and increasingly so. God can't even appear when he is asked to, much less heal people who aren't under the chains of suggestion in some way.

 

3: Medicine is brought about by evidence. Healing, whether Christian, Muslim, Hindu or New Age, knows no evidence beyond the personal experience in the head of those who claim to have been healed.

 

There are many more, but I dare you to look them up by yourself.

 

I'm not a pantheist, but I do respect and adore nature. I don't prostrate before it though, as I don't expect it to have a will, seeing as there's no evidence of some mega-complex of nerves that could form some sort of gigantic brain that would have the capacity fo want something for each and every animal on this planet and all other inhabited planets.

 

Last but not least - people are perfectly capable of turning their own lives around, although I'm sure fear of hell if they don't makes its contributions, not to mention the guilt-trip they're sent on by their local church when they hear of a sacrifice made for their alleged sins that they didn't even ask for, much less can help the need of and then being charged the bill for it.

[florduh]

I realize also that people make stuff up for things they don't understand, but we understand much more than did our ancestors, so why does God still exist. Should we be identifying the functions rather than the entity?

 

My translation of this:

 

"I realize Man has always attributed the unknowns to the gods. The more we know, the less we need a god to explain our universe. So why do we still use 'god' as an explanation for the unknown?"

 

My answer is:

 

For as far as we have advanced in technology and understanding, mankind is still a fearful, superstitious lot. Rather than say that we just don't know something yet, we say that since we don't know it must be god. Maybe eventually we'll run out of reasons to invent gods.

[Robbobrob]

I realize also that people make stuff up for things they don't understand, but we understand much more than did our ancestors, so why does God still exist. Should we be identifying the functions rather than the entity?

 

My translation of this:

 

"I realize Man has always attributed the unknowns to the gods. The more we know, the less we need a god to explain our universe. So why do we still use 'god' as an explanation for the unknown?"

 

My answer is:

 

For as far as we have advanced in technology and understanding, mankind is still a fearful, superstitious lot. Rather than say that we just don't know something yet, we say that since we don't know it must be god. Maybe eventually we'll run out of reasons to invent gods.

And my addition to this is that there are many people, from many religions, who are trying actively to get us to forget what we have learned and go back to a time, "the good old days" (which were not as good as they think they were), where people supposedly obeyed God alone and did not question His Creation.

 

I have been reading "The Bible According to Mark Twain" and his arguments against Christianity are EXACTLY the same as those used here on this board by many members. This is a fight that has gone on for generations, renewed because new generations "discover" them. Probably goes all the way back to when cavemen rode dinosaurs (according to the Creation Museum).

[R. S. Martin]

....where did the concept of "god" come from? What put this in people's heads?

 

<snip>

 

<snip>

 

Your church started because the Campbells got the idea that the Presbyterian church was wrong. And the Presbyterians got started because they got the idea that the Church of England was wrong, and the Church of England got started because Henry the Eighth got the idea that he wanted another wife, and the Catholic Church got started when Constantine got the idea of a new religion to unite his empire. Paul started his churches when he got the idea that Peter's church was wrong, Peter's church got started out of his guru's idea the Jews were wrong, The Jews got started when Isaiah got the idea that only his invisible god was real. Where the rest of the invisible gods came from I don't know enough to say. Nevertheless, I think they all started as an idea in someone's brain.

 

Here is a cool theory: God comes from the two halves of the human brain. That is the left half thinking that orders from the right half are from the exterior because it is not aware of the connection. see Bicameralism

 

 

Now that's a story that every history of religion class should hear.

[Guest end3]

I think the jury to still be out. Thinking about it today, I was thinking that even if we knew the exact chemisty and physics of life and environment, I still don't think we could accurately predict personality/spirit for lack better words. Maybe the unpredictability within a complex living system, and that placed in a complex environment, is God. I don't know.

[Legion]

I don't know.

I think wiser words are rarely spoken. I don't know either End. I don't know about a lot of things. Sometimes I think we muck around here on this little planet and constantly confuse what we know with what we think we know.

 

 

Hubris, arrogance and vanity.