There are 2 choices, 2 votes for Gyne and Tonic's debate

The nature of "God"

• god is unconcious

  I've been thinking about this for months now and have come to a pleasing conclusion.
  
  There are, undeniably, forces in this universe greater than us, such as nature, gravity, and what not. There are also those difficult to define concepts of time, space, and fate. These are all things people typically associate with God, a god or gods/goddesses. So, if these things exist, then we could say that "God" exists.
  
  However, this is where my opinion differs from the mainstream--I don't believe this force, or god thing, is conscious. This means that this "being is unaware of its existence and of how it affects the world. This brings me to think to say: there is indeed a higher power, if not more than one; however, the nature of this higher power isn't quite what we thought it was.
  
  It is energy, the force of nature. It cannot be appeased or anger. It can't listen or speak. It merely exists, working silently in the background without the slightest regard to anything beyond it.

  Voted for by Gyne and Tonic.

  View 15 comments Hide Comments

  Please login or register to comment.

  Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!

  • right now

    Adding your comment:
  • 
    Dwn
    February 6
    Edit | Reply

    I think that your sort of on track

    God is not unaware of his own exstance, however mankind became so vile , that he no longer sees us nor acknowledges our existance except under the covering of the blood of Christ, Jesus does intersede with him for us , but he onley allows himself to see that which is brought before him by Jesus
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 7
      Edit | Reply
      How can you be sure? My concept of god is supported by just the same amount of evidence others use to support their theory on god. I'm not saying I'm right, but how can you say I'm off track when you have no definite answer yourself.
  • 
    Kazrith
    February 6
    Edit | Reply

    i am with you on this one gyne

    many of the ancient religions believed that light was god. which has been aquired by many of the religions of today (ie christianity). people depict god as light guiding them. as scientists know, light is merely energy.
  • 
    petethemeat
    February 6
    Edit | Reply
    Your opinions about God are similar to those that Einstein held.
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 6
      Edit | Reply
      that's cool. I didn't know that; although I'm not surprised he did.
  • 
    mudgod
    February 6
    Edit | Reply
    The God of the Bible tells us to prove all things. Even His existence. It can be done by those that are truely searching to know.
  • 
    pnktrky
    February 7
    Edit | Reply
    but once it is proven to be true there will be no denying it, if proven false what a commotion that would be although technically thats impossible... you can only prove the truth of something not the lack of it.
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 7
      Edit | Reply
      Not true . . . --no-one can prove that extra terrestrials exist but that doesn't mean they do just because there's a lack of evidence to support their non-existence. the same could be said about ghosts, flying saucers, and God.
  • 
    TeChNoWC
    February 9
    Edit | Reply
    That's not what pnktrky said. He said that you cannot prove that something doesn't exist, only that it does. It may not exist, but you cannot never prove that.
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 9
      Edit | Reply
      Actually, what you've written is just what I got from pnktrky's comment.
  • 
    TeChNoWC
    February 11
    Edit | Reply
    Well your argument showed your misunderstanding. There was no suggestion that something must exist if you can't prove it doesn't exist, which would be just about everything and very odd logic.
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 11
      Edit | Reply
      It was suggested here:
      
      "if proven false what a commotion that would be although technically thats impossible"
      
      Granted, the lack of supporting evidence does not necessarily prove something's nonexistence; however, it suggests that it doesn't. At least, that's the rational approach to it.
  • 
    TeChNoWC
    February 11
    Edit | Reply
    Not really, just an uninformed surmise.
  • • 
      Gyne and Tonic
      February 12
      Edit | Reply
      It's an educated guess. Scientist do it with their research. Even ghost hunters deny the presence of spiritual activity when they find nothing to support the claims.

  Please register or login to comment! It's totally free
• right now

  Adding your reply:
• Your Comment: