is there a GOD (463)

Who is 'Our' as in; "Let us make man in 'our' image"?

Happens to the best of us.

I did note that you skipped over the poor logic response regarding what proves a god exists; but if I were you, and still wanted to believe in god I would avoid that one like the plague. It's a paradox you likely won't want to examine.

Life itself shows there is an order to all development, an order shared by the ants in the soil to the stars in the sky. From this you could say the universe follows an archetype and thus has an architect behind it, something you could call God.

However, what separates mankind from everything else in nature is the capacity for self-awareness. The common perception of God is a God that also shares this self-awareness. This is what I consider irrational about monotheistic religion; as the majority of nature is not self-aware, then shouldn't God be more likely akin to nature, and not man?

I think what we could call God would have, in itself, no notion of the term God or any idea of the role it performs in/over nature. God would be entirely instinct.

You pose some interesting points here but for now just one point intrigues me in your line of thought.

What would constitute a 'majority of nature', especially in this infinite universe of which human contact in this physical form is so minimal as to be negligible in the greater scheme of things.

The second part of my question would be. How would, could we possible judge self awareness in other species and more to the point such things as the self awareness of cells? Do you rule these things out simply from inability to communicate openly with them?

I'd love to dive into some of your other comments but the above is likely a full blown discussion on it's own.

I’m sitting here looking at my ‘King James’ Bible’ and reading
the ‘creation’, again, as stated in the book of Genesis;
Chapter 1 verse 3;
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Verse 4;
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the
light from the darkness.
Verse 5;
And God called the light Day and the darkness he called Night.
And the evening and the morning were the first day? (no sunrise nor sunset, very clever)
Verse 14;
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven
to divide the day from the night etc. ( I thought He did that in verse 4)
Verse 15;
And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give
light upon the earth: and it was so.
Verse 16;
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day,
and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

What I would like to know is; where did the light in ‘verse 3’ come from?
It seems that if you ‘really’ read the Bible, you will come to
the ‘obvious’ conclusion that it is all ‘speculation’ and that nothing,
ever, has been proven.
I’m not saying that there is no ’Creator’ as I have said before but ’this God’
or any other ’man made God’ just doesn’t work for me.
There are so many unanswered questions and the answers are certainly not
found in any ’religious’ book.

Plants an cells show evidence of aelfawarness in my opinion. Notice that a plant in the dark tends to grow towards the light. How does it know where the light is? You could make it sound like a computer and use the word "detect" the light, but, how does that differ from "knowing" where the light is? Our consciousnss comes from our brains, or so the scientists say; but how can they know if consciousness doesn' arise from other sources in other species?

On interpretation is that the sun is not the only source of light, so the day and night before the first day came about from another light source from he sun not explicitly explained. Here is another explanation:

When examining the Genesis account, it is helpful to keep in mind that it approaches matters from the standpoint of people on earth. So it describes events as they would have been seen by human observers had they been present. This can be noted from its treatment of events on the fourth Genesis “day.” There the sun and moon are described as great luminaries in comparison to the stars. Yet many stars are far greater than our sun, and the moon is insignificant in comparison to them. But not to an earthly observer. So, as seen from the earth, the sun appears to be a ‘greater light that rules the day’ and the moon a ‘lesser light that dominates the night.’—Genesis 1:14-18.

Genesis 1:1 indicates that the earth could have existed for billions of years before the first Genesis “day,” though it does not say for how long. However, it does describe what earth’s condition was just before that first “day” began in Genesis 1:2 "and darkness was upon the face of the waters."


“‘Let light come to be.’ Then there came to be light. And God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a first day.”—Genesis 1:3, 5.

Of course the sun and moon were in outer space long before this first “day,” but their light did not reach the surface of the earth for an earthly observer to see. Now, light evidently came to be visible on earth on this first “day,” and the rotating earth began to have alternating days and nights.

Apparently, the light came in a gradual process, extending over a long period of time, not instantaneously as when you turn on an electric light bulb. The Genesis rendering by translator J. W. Watts reflects this when it says: “And gradually light came into existence.” (A Distinctive Translation of Genesis) This light was from the sun, but the sun itself could not be seen through the overcast. Hence, the light that reached earth was “light diffused,” as indicated by a comment about verse 3 in Rotherham’s Emphasised Bible.—See footnote b for verse 14.

Genesis 1:14-16; Psalm 136:7-9.

Previously, on the first “day,” the expression “Let light come to be” was used. The Hebrew word there used for “light” is ’ohr, meaning light in a general sense. But on the fourth “day,” the Hebrew word changes to ma•’ohr', which means the source of the light. Rotherham, in a footnote on “Luminaries” in the Emphasised Bible, says: “In ver. 3, ’ôr , light diffused.” Then he goes on to show that the Hebrew word ma•’ohr' in verse 14 means something “affording light.” On the first “day” diffused light evidently penetrated the swaddling bands, but the sources of that light could not have been seen by an earthly observer because of the cloud layers still enveloping the earth. Now, on this fourth “day,” things apparently changed.

An atmosphere initially rich in carbon dioxide may have caused an earth-wide hot climate. But the lush growth of vegetation during the third and fourth creative periods would absorb some of this heat-retaining blanket of carbon dioxide. The vegetation, in turn, would release oxygen—a requirement for animal life.

Now, had there been an earthly observer, he would be able to discern the sun, moon and stars, which would “serve as signs and for seasons and for days and years.” (Genesis 1:14) The moon would indicate the passing of lunar months, and the sun the passing of solar years. The seasons that now “came to be” on this fourth “day” would no doubt have been much milder than they became later on.—Genesis 1:15; 8:20-22.

As always, no rational arguement for the existence of this god and just the attacking of a quite evidently mistyped line.... So again show some PROOF of this god

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? – Epicurus

Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense. – Chapman Cohen

When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion. – Robert Pirsig

Of course if you took the time to read MY QUOTE and not others adding to it, you'd see I didn't write LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE... The whole GOD thing's taking up too much of your R.A.M.

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. – Christopher Hitchens (pictured)

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. – Stephen Roberts

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike. – Delos B. McKown