Is it God or Nature?

[harmonica]

hahhahaha
there is no god--no one can prove it = there's your answer--yes--stuff happens in nature without god
...you like how I answered your question? your welcome

I take it you're a subscriber to the big bang theory, yes?

..I'm a subscriber to if it's not proven = bullshit --not true

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

If that doesn’t give you pause for concern, I don’t know what will.

where is the proof of god?

Existence is your proof. It is literally all around you.

no it's not
plain and simple--no one has proof of god
all you have is babbling fairytales....burning bush/etc
''god talked to me''' ---hahhahahahhaha

 

[ding]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

No, rylah is correct. Nature is God is pantheism. Then God is limited to the natural world. While God is nature is true like you state, it could just be a subset of God. God is more than nature because he also encompasses the supernatural beyond time and space. Multiverses were disproved, so the atheist scientists like Brian Greene hypothesize that there are more than 10 dimensions. These theoretical physicists are nutballers.

The natural world was created by God. Saying God is nature means God created himself. The painter is not the painting. God is uncreated. God is eternal. God is unchanging.

 

[ding]

hahhahaha
there is no god--no one can prove it = there's your answer--yes--stuff happens in nature without god
...you like how I answered your question? your welcome

I take it you're a subscriber to the big bang theory, yes?

..I'm a subscriber to if it's not proven = bullshit --not true

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

If that doesn’t give you pause for concern, I don’t know what will.

where is the proof of god?

Existence is your proof. It is literally all around you.

no it's not
plain and simple--no one has proof of god
all you have is babbling fairytales....burning bush/etc
''god talked to me''' ---hahhahahahhaha

I just gave you the proof. The universe was literally created from nothing. That’s all the proof you need.

 

[rylah]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water poured into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

 

[ding]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

 

[rylah]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

I see things the Torah way.

 

[Papageorgio]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

If it was God, you wouldn’t have to ask the question.

 

[BreezeWood]

hahhahaha
there is no god--no one can prove it = there's your answer--yes--stuff happens in nature without god
...you like how I answered your question? your welcome

I take it you're a subscriber to the big bang theory, yes?

..I'm a subscriber to if it's not proven = bullshit --not true

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

If that doesn’t give you pause for concern, I don’t know what will.

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

.
- only by your limited mentality ...

obviously what "popped" into existence was a preset construction meant for that purpose by the radiant metaphysical forces that similarly are in control now after the event.

 

[JimBowie1958]

where is the proof of god?

First define what you mean by 'god'.

Then read Aristotle, Plato, and Thomas Aquinas.

Maybe then you can seriously ask the question, dude.

 

[JimBowie1958]

where is the proof of god?

Existence is your proof. It is literally all around you.

Where is proof that 'harmonica' is even really interested in looking for 'god'.

I dont really think he is or he would have better questions.

These guys are like a flying skeptic in 1900 saying to a group of pilots sitting in a bar, 'OK, show me you can fly.'

The only proper response is 'Sorry, dude, you have to go where the airplanes are, and they are not in this bar.'

 

[ding]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

I see things the Torah way.

Not for awhile you didn’t. You were literally equivocating God with nature when you quibbled with my wording. I on the other hand was firm in my belief that God is not nature and nature is not God. The painter is not the painting. You quibbled over that too.

 

[ding]

where is the proof of god?

Existence is your proof. It is literally all around you.

Where is proof that 'harmonica' is even really interested in looking for 'god'.

I dont really think he is or he would have better questions.

These guys are like a flying skeptic in 1900 saying to a group of pilots sitting in a bar, 'OK, show me you can fly.'

The only proper response is 'Sorry, dude, you have to go where the airplanes are, and they are not in this bar.'

Yeah, he’s just trolling. It’s pretty obvious.

 

[ding]

hahhahaha
there is no god--no one can prove it = there's your answer--yes--stuff happens in nature without god
...you like how I answered your question? your welcome

I take it you're a subscriber to the big bang theory, yes?

..I'm a subscriber to if it's not proven = bullshit --not true

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

If that doesn’t give you pause for concern, I don’t know what will.

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

.
- only by your limited mentality ...

obviously what "popped" into existence was a preset construction meant for that purpose by the radiant metaphysical forces that similarly are in control now after the event.

Cool story, bro. Can you tell it in English?

God has always existed as the matrix or source of the material world. God is glorified through his creation and he shares in our experiences.

 

[james bond]

no it's not
plain and simple--no one has proof of god
all you have is babbling fairytales....burning bush/etc
''god talked to me''' ---hahhahahahhaha

Is this evidence? Follow my logic here.

Satan is the one spreading the coronavirus. He wants to get as many atheist/agnostic souls as possible by killing them for once they are dead, they cannot repent. Thus, it's mostly the atheists/ags who are dying.

ETA: How's your temperature? Not feeling too warm I hope.

 

[rylah]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

I see things the Torah way.

Not for awhile you didn’t. You were literally equivocating God with nature when you quibbled with my wording. I on the other hand was firm in my belief that God is not nature and nature is not God. The painter is not the painting. You quibbled over that too.

My argument was perfectly consistent.
I addressed your logical fallacy giving the Jewish perspective.
Now you just pretend to own that which you didn't get until explained 'on fingers'.

Silly games...

What is that you want really?

 

[ding]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

I see things the Torah way.

Not for awhile you didn’t. You were literally equivocating God with nature when you quibbled with my wording. I on the other hand was firm in my belief that God is not nature and nature is not God. The painter is not the painting. You quibbled over that too.

My argument was perfectly consistent.
I addressed your logical fallacy giving the Jewish perspective.
Now you just pretend to own that which you didn't get until explained 'on fingers'.

Silly games...

What is that you want really?

I had no fallacy. God is not nature. Nature is not God.

Which one of those statements do you disagree with?

 

[ding]

Is this Covid-19 pandemic a result of God's actions, or an ecological/biological/sociological process that reflects Nature?

If God, then why?
If Nature, is it a "correction" in the balance of life among the human species?
Survival of the "fittest" ... and rich/powerful (access to life-saving resources)?

Perhaps population density, some foul sanitary/eating habits, and easy global travel opportunities are "correcting" overpopulation of humans?
Maybe God wants to give non-human animals a break?
What say you?

God is nature.
God created us in his image and gave us stewardship over his creation. Overpopulation is not a problem here. The things you mention in your second paragraph are examples of our poor stewardship. Therefore we are punished.

God is nature is a pantheistic world view. How can the painter be the painting?

False comparison.

Pantheism doesn't say "G-d is nature" rather the other way around "Nature is G-d".
That's a totally different perspective, namely that G-d is confined by nature and not beyond.

A painting once drawn doesn't require the painter to exist.
Not so with creation which is entirely dependent on G-d to constantly renew, recreate it,
each moment anew into existence.

Lol, you are splitting hairs. Same difference.

Not at all,
resorting to void terms of their meaning in such an infantile almost cartoon-ish manner,
in a attempt to hide one's superficial (mis)understanding, is merely an insecurity-fueled avoidance of the complexity of the terms in use.

It's no different from one pretending to participate in such a discussion,
while grasping at an absolute assumption that "G-d doesn't exist",
in a religiously-blind manner.

Same superficial level.

There is nothing cartoonish about the equivalence of saying God is nature and nature is God. A=B is the same as saying B=A.

I understand what I am saying very well despite your objections which are bordering on childish. Try having an adult conversation. In fact research transactional analysis to see how adults discuss things.

I am not insecure or being superficial when I say there is no difference between A=B and B=A. I am being logical.

And my understanding of the nature of God has been informed by my study of what God created and from my personal relationship with God. So I am not grasping at anything and I have been most conscientious and thoughtful in my study. Which is more than I can say for your behaviors in this conversation.

God exists outside of nature. God exists outside of space and time. God is beyond energy and matter. I know this because matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the presence of matter and energy creates space and time. I know God is eternal because an infinite regression of material events is impossible because matter and energy cannot be eternal without reaching thermal equilibrium. So whatever the first cause is it must be beyond matter and energy.

The closest I can come to describing God is consciousness without form.

But that's what you're overlooking A ≠ B, rather A>B.

Let's try compare it to a water filled bottle in the midst of the sea.
I say I taste sea water in the bottle, You say the water pored into the bottle is not the sea.
And on that we both agree. Yet for some reason you keep claiming that me pointing to the saltiness of the water as indication of its origin in the see, is the same as me claiming the bottle is the sea.

Its a silly logical fallacy, a resort to a straw man,
because you can't comprehend there's a more complex reality beyond the two.

ding I edited a bit.

I have been saying that A isn’t equal to B and that B isn’t equal to A. That A is greater than B

I am glad you see things my way.

I see things the Torah way.

Not for awhile you didn’t. You were literally equivocating God with nature when you quibbled with my wording. I on the other hand was firm in my belief that God is not nature and nature is not God. The painter is not the painting. You quibbled over that too.

My argument was perfectly consistent.
I addressed your logical fallacy giving the Jewish perspective.
Now you just pretend to own that which you didn't get until explained 'on fingers'.

Silly games...

What is that you want really?

Pride goes before the fall. Set your pride aside and acknowledge that you were arguing for the sake of arguing lest you have to admit that you believe God is nature.

 

[BreezeWood]

hahhahaha
there is no god--no one can prove it = there's your answer--yes--stuff happens in nature without god
...you like how I answered your question? your welcome

I take it you're a subscriber to the big bang theory, yes?

..I'm a subscriber to if it's not proven = bullshit --not true

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

If that doesn’t give you pause for concern, I don’t know what will.

Well it’s been proven that the universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago and was created from nothing.

.
- only by your limited mentality ...

obviously what "popped" into existence was a preset construction meant for that purpose by the radiant metaphysical forces that similarly are in control now after the event.

Cool story, bro. Can you tell it in English?

God has always existed as the matrix or source of the material world. God is glorified through his creation and he shares in our experiences.

God has always existed as the matrix or source of the material world. God is glorified through his creation and he shares in our experiences.

.
that's not what you said -

energy - matter > the metaphysical, both sides of cyclical singularity ... not hard to understand at all.
.
hopefully there is guidance to the metaphysical as in practicality exists in all beings on Earth - just not found in the forged writings of the desert religions.

 

[harmonica]

no it's not
plain and simple--no one has proof of god
all you have is babbling fairytales....burning bush/etc
''god talked to me''' ---hahhahahahhaha

Is this evidence? Follow my logic here.

Satan is the one spreading the coronavirus. He wants to get as many atheist/agnostic souls as possible by killing them for once they are dead, they cannot repent. Thus, it's mostly the atheists/ags who are dying.

ETA: How's your temperature? Not feeling too warm I hope.

hahahhahah-do you realize how idiotic you sound?? only atheists/etc are dying
????????!!!!!!??????

 

[harmonica]

where is the proof of god?

First define what you mean by 'god'.

Then read Aristotle, Plato, and Thomas Aquinas.

Maybe then you can seriously ask the question, dude.

....you also do not provide any proof....you people keep babbling a lot of crap and NOT providing proof = I am right