At least, those of us subject to the laws of physics and thermodynamics.
Whether we choose to call such an entity “god” or not.
[/quote]
When you conflate these laws of physics and thermodynamics with God Himself rather than recognizing them as God-created – which is what I think you’re doing – you err.[/quote]
When you assume that I conflate these laws of physics and thermodynamics with god rather than recognizing them as god-created – which is what I think you’re doing – you err.[/quote]
So I can flat out state that I would not mind at all being dependent upon pagan gods and goddesses out in the wilderness, particularly the cloven-hoofed, horned god of nature whose image was co-opted by Christianity to represent the Devil, because I imagine he’d supply me with spirits of wood and water in the form of beautiful young women, and Push says not a word…
…but if I say something, as an afterthought, that he imagines as implying that the Deist god of nature might be equivalent to what we would call the laws of nature, then he is quick to rebuke me.
[quote]pabergin wrote:
… be completely and utterly dependent on the government for provision of your needs
OR
be completely and utterly dependent on God (even if atheist etc) for provision of your needs? [/quote]
I already live in the first scenario. If I were to choose the other, it would have to be a benevolent god, that actually interacted in the world, much unlike todays main religions gods. Varqanir has provided the best options for gods so far. I also like the Valhall model.
