Thread: God is nature

We already have a word for nature. It's called "nature".

Well congartulations you are a idiot. What the diffrence between god and nature? Does god give us our food or does nature?

god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism

seriously don't you get bored of discussing these things ?... just go out and enjoy your life ...
(i'm pretty sure some retard is gonna ask me to define life in the above sentence)

Why use "God" as a synonym for "nature", especially with all the many ways "God" can be misinterpreted in such a context? All it does is lead to confusion, whereas calling nature "nature" does not.

Originally Posted by Dreamhope11

you are a idiot.

priceless

The fact that nature implements a low-loss cycle that allows the ecosystem of the world to exist does not imply that it's "god"... Your argument starts with a false premise. I appreciate that we have such a well-balanced nature, but that doesn't mean we should worship it, though it DOES make more sense to worship nature than to worship a 2000 year old missing corpse.

Originally Posted by Dreamhope11

God is nature, nature provides our seeds to eat, nature provides our water, nature takes in dangerous C02 Gases, nature provides protection from the sun, nature provides food for animals so they are big and fat for us to eat. To destroy nature is to destroy god. God is neither spirit or form, god is a course of random events which led to earths creation. So don't pray to god when you and i are the ones are destroying god and taking natural recourses without thought.

nature also provides hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes, earthquake, volcanic eruptions, and massive tidal waves, they all can either do little damage or devastate a place and kill all the way from one person to ????? no telling how many, so saying god is only nature you would also be making him out to be a killer.

Yes nature does provide disasters, the ancient romans thought earthquakes where caused by GOD, any natural disaster was caused by GOD. If god is a high and mighty being why didn't he/her whatever make the earth perfect with no dangerous volcanoes etc.

Life=nature, take away nature there is no life.

I came not to bring peace, but a sword.
Does that ring any bells, god telling people to go on crusades and fight for there religion.

how's that mean to fight for religion?

that's your interpretation of it

Actually, I find nature as god to sound more reasonable than the claims of most religions.

Anyone here watch the recent series Earth: The Biography on National Geographic? The episode on volcanoes was very enlightening. The basic premise is that without volcanoes, there would probably not have been life. Also, they very clearly showed how without ice and tectonic plate movement, we likely would not have evolved nearly as far as we have, especially in regards to brain size and adaptability.

Fantastic series, by the way. Catch it if you can.

Originally Posted by wa'el

god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism ... god atheism theism

seriously don't you get bored of discussing these things ?... just go out and enjoy your life ...
(i'm pretty sure some retard is gonna ask me to define life in the above sentence)

You know that this is a religion discussion forum, right? If you have a problem with discussion of religion, you are in the wrong place.

No, I do not support the idea that nature is God. If you want to talk about nature then call it nature, do not confuse the issue.

nature takes in dangerous C02 Gases

Why is that third on your list? CO2 (not 02, you clearly do not have any understanding of chemistry anyway) is not dangerous, in fact without the gas there would be absolutely no life on the planet and it would also be completely inhospitable. It's not harmful to humans either...

C02 in small quantities is fine, but when you have gas guzzling veichles which spew out tonnes and tonnes of the stuff surely that can't be good, or am i wrong in saying that?

Again, it's CO2, not C02.

The O2 means the molecule has 2 oxygen atoms.

Not for nature as a whole. CO[O for Oxygen...]2 levels used to be vast in comparison to what they are now but the planet wasn't ridiculously hot like the media would probably have you believe, in fact it was rather similar. Maybe some crops will be negatively effected but really... I very much doubt the CO2 we're releasing is going to make much of a difference in the long run, it's not a major greenhouse gas and it's in minute quantities compared to more important ones like water vapour. Plus the fact is, we are going to use up all the oil. All of these attempts to curb climate change are completely futile because there's no way that we're not going to burn every last drop of oil on the planet.

It annoys me because it obscures the really really large threats to humanity; overpopulation, disease, the collapse of the energy industry, the holecene extinction event... these things are far far more important.

I know what it means i just type to quick.
O2 O2 Is my mobile phone provider

It can't be good that why nature gave us trees so we can carry on breathing and not choke to death from toxic air.

I don't see the point... burning fossil fuels releases CO2 which trees photosynthesise into O2, and CO2 isn't toxic anyway, it just goes into our lungs and back out again. Nature doesn't 'want' us to be here, by the way. In fact, nature killed virtually every organism on the planet once, by poisoning them with oxygen. Nature doesn't care.

If only nature had given you a brain along with the trees.

Originally Posted by Dreamhope11

C02 in small quantities is fine, but when you have gas guzzling veichles which spew out tonnes and tonnes of the stuff surely that can't be good, or am i wrong in saying that?

there's tons and tons of plants and people and animals in the world, more than vehicles i'm sure, they all produce co2 during respiration, so should we destroy all of them for it?

So we should not worry about greenhouse gases? Fine with me.
CO2 was made to breathed out not in, how long could you last in a room with just CO2 to breath on?

If god created nature then like you said, why did nature almost destroy all organisms? Surely god wouldn't want that, would he?

After all god must be one who created nature if he is the creator?

Originally Posted by Dreamhope11

So we should not worry about greenhouse gases? Fine with me.
CO2 was made to breathed out not in, how long could you last in a room with just CO2 to breath on?

If god created nature then like you said, why did nature almost destroy all organisms? Surely god wouldn't want that, would he?

After all god must be one who created nature if he is the creator?

we didn't say it, you did

you said god is nature, therefore he's a killer according to you.

and i don't think we should be talking about being in a room with co2 because earth is vast and it isn't a small room.

So nature created its self?
OOOOOHHH i see god created earth WITHOUT nature. Makes perfect sense to me.

Originally Posted by Dreamhope11

So nature created its self?
OOOOOHHH i see god created earth WITHOUT nature. Makes perfect sense to me.

What makes you think God created the Earth in the first place?

Originally Posted by Xei

Nature doesn't 'want' us to be here, by the way. In fact, nature killed virtually every organism on the planet once, by poisoning them with oxygen. Nature doesn't care.

Xei is right about this. Nature (whether "God-Nature" or the more mundane variety) doesn't "care" about humans or any other organism. Balance happens by way of natural selection.

We evolved to prefer a certain mix of gases to breathe precisely because those were the gases we had all around us. Offspring that couldn't process these gases well died off, and we were selected for breathing the air that existed.

Plants are a part of the equation that makes up the composition of air, as they keep CO2 levels lower than they would be, and oxygen higher. We are part of the equation as well, as we keep oxygen levels lower than they would be, and CO2 higher. Plants and mammals evolved together to be part of this system of balance.

The good news is that we generally adapt quickly enough to keep our survival going. I'd hate to see a hot Earth that kills off much life (just an example), but if it happens, those who are better adapted at living in hot weather will be selected for, and the population will continue. It's actually change in climate that drives evolution, and the more drastic the change (up to a point), the faster the adaptation, although at a larger cost in terms of lives.

The Earth tends to seek balance, but that doesn't mean there is only one possible way for it to be balanced. If we manage to throw ourselves into a globally warmed Earth that is intolerable and we all die out, other life forms will emerge that are selected for the new balance, and they will owe their very existence to our self-destruction. And the Earth.... it won't care bit.

To put it into perspective, here are some things that HAD to happen in order for homo sapiens to emerge:

1. Countless eruptions of volcanoes
2. The comet that destroyed dinosaur life and changed our climate
3. The most recent ice age that forced our ancestors to learn to adapt

I'm not ready to have humans disappear, but I'm comforted in knowing that when we do, there will be plenty of life left over to take our place.