A world view that denies the property of divinity in the universe is called atheism, and a theistic world view affirms divinity. So deciding which is true requires determining whether or not there is divinity in the universe. The problem comes down to answering the question "is a world without divinity observably different than a world with that property?"

In physics, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, accepted as true by all practicing physicists, holds that for a quantum particle, knowledge of position precludes knowledge of momentum. More precisely, the more we know about a particle's location, the less we can know about its momentum. However, an omniscient being would, by definition, know both position and momentum of all particles, in violation of known physics.

Further, in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics (the majority view of physicists), a state of quantum superposition, in which particles can exist in two states simultaneously, requires that a particle's quantum state be unobserved. Hence, the existence of an omniscient being would short-circuit attempts to establish ambiguous quantum states, as is routinely done in physics research laboratories.

Therefore, the question above is answered in the affirmative, if we assume divinity involves omniscience: we can tell there is no divinity in the world because if there were, quantum mechanics would be very different than what we have found to be the case. QED.

The great scientific genius, who brought us the power of alternating current, among other things, including the Tesla coil and radio--Nicola Tesla said: "God has no properties".

ABOUT TESLA AND THE RADIO, check out:
http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_whoradio.html
Marconi and radio: Marconi got the credit for inventing the radio because of his connections. He was also a great self-promoter.

I agree with Tesla, and I will add: GØD is not a property, in any way, shape or form. This is why I feel we need a new term for the god-concept. Orthodox Jews use G-d. I like to use the acronym, GØD--symbolizing all goodness, all mathematical order and design and that which bring order out of the chaos, which I understand is the very basis of quantum mechanics.

BTW, the son of an Orthodox priest, Tesla was highly mystical/spiritual and felt the cosmos as being one with the divine mind he thought of as God. It is my opinion that his refusal to sell his soul to the evil of materialism--at its height in the 1930's--probably saved the globe from being totally destroyed by those who would have had no qualms about using the destructive force of atomic power--about which he was well aware. Einstein was not the only one who knew about the power of the atom.

Keep in mind: It is highly probably that the maniacs who came to power at that time would have used atomic power, if they had had it, to its full extent. It is obvious what Hitler did to Germany, in the face of defeat. I believe he would have done the same to the rest of the world, to avoid defeat, had he power to do so.

IMO, if we are going to make any real progress in understanding the GØD-concept--a concept filled with all kinds of human potential--we will need to empty our heads of the superstitious god-concept of theism and its rebellious child, atheism. Both conceive of that which does not exist.

Interesting thought... you not only successfully limited God within the realms of modern physics but also defiled "GOD" by bounding it to divine-mundane concept.. Bravo!!!!!

Thank you.

lol.. sorry if I sounded like a dick...

Apology accepted. Now I ask, in what forum should the following question be posted: What kind of a sound does a dick make?

I think he meant "dick-head" which would be sounding somewhat like Richard Cheney, the Vice President of the United States of America.

BTW, the process philosophy and theology of the great mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead, which makes a lot of sense to me, wrote about process theism http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-theism/.
Process theologians write about panENntheism, not to be confused with pantheism. To avoid confusion, I prefer to us a doublet, unitheism. As a unitheist I say: There is no ONE god; GØD and Nature--physically, mentally and spiritually--are the One.



In otherwords, I take this to mean that GØD is simply a name for what is happening in the eternal now and the infinity of space. We are always on the cutting edge of time. The past is only a fading memory and the future is only an illusive dream. The one true reality is now; this is why we call it a present.

So, God also needs to be omnipotent if he is to be omniscient?

Orbz comments, "So, God also needs to be omnipotent if he is to be omniscient? "

What is your theological position, Orbz?

Call me an incurable spirituanist--I include all good religions, not just Judaeo/Christian--if you will, but it is my opinion--And I admit that I have no proof for my opinion--that as long as we human beings keep on creating gods, or a God, in our own material images, and referring to god/God as a who, or a being separate and apart from us--one who we can call "he"--we shall miss the whole point of being made by process philosophy and theology.

Process theology says that, in tune with the infinite and eternal GØD potential, we are in the process of becoming omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and eternal beings--GØD-like, if you will. We begin the process when we choose to be moral, ethical and all-loving. This is what Paul had in mind when, in I Corinthians 13, he wrote: Faith, hope and love, but the greatest of these is love.

BTW, in my opinion, I do not insist that one must adhere to a formal religion, or creeds. We can each go our own way, as long as this does not mean that it is okay to be immoral, unethical and un-loving. The process, as Jesus taught, has to do with being human, and doing humane things, not with spouting set creeds. Loners, atheists and agnostic welcome. I am a unitheist because I admit that I need a little help, the fellowship of others and some invisible means of support.

Depending on what time of day, who's asking me or what you're asking me about, I generally ascribe to;
phsyicalism, atheism, pantheism or taoism

Orbz responded, "Depending on what time of day, who's asking me or what you're asking me about, I generally ascribe to; phsyicalism, atheism, pantheism or taoism."
ABOUT PHYSICALISM--From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
=====================================================
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/

I presume that physicalism allows for non-material "things" like gravity.

Sounds okay to me, as long as physicalists are also advocates of moral, ethical and loving actions which promote justice and peace for all the world. As the New Testament puts it: "God so loved the world..." In his Sermon on the Mount Jesus advocated that we are to be humane even to our enemies. The Golden Rule, principle or law is to be applied universally. Jesus was not an advocate churchianity.
He probably lived and died as a Reform Jew.

THIS IS INTERESTING
==================
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/
12. The Case Against Physicalism I: Qualia and Consciousness
Having provided an answer to the interpretation question, I now turn to the truth question: is physicalism (as we have interpreted it so far) true? I will first discuss three reasons for supposing that physicalism is not true. Then I will consider the case for physicalism.

If I am not mistaken, Rick once told us that, for him, the highest good is "nature".
Now he writes about the universe, which I assume he equates with nature This comment prompts me to ask: Rick, what do you mean by "the property of divinity"? What is your concept of "divinity".
You go on Given the fact that both theists and panentheists (unitheists) agree that divinity is not a thing which can be contained in anything, but contains everything, the question is pointless.

BTW, unitheists feel that GOD is around, in and through everything.

You go on Here is where unitheists differ from theists. Unitheists say: GOD is not a super and human-like being, who walks around knowing things, of anykind.
Rick goes on Since GOD is not a being, such a comment makes no sense to unitheists. I will let theists answer for themselves.
Rick concludes There is a lot of assuming going on, here. Again I ask: Define what you mean by "divinity".

Wow i really like how you put it! "rebellious child" i was looking for words such as this to describe what i felt it was for a long time! Thanks!

BTW, Zhenka, if I were back to thinking like I used to think when I was a young theist--quite a long time ago--I would be petitioning God: "O God, I beseech you to reveal yourself in all your glory to all those who question your existence. Open their blind eyes, closed minds and soften their hard hearts...I do not have the power of persuasion and I need your help...etc."

BTW, there many such prayers--prayers filled with frustration, anger and even despair--found in the book of Psalms. See psalms 10, 38, 69, and 102, for a few examples.
They are best understood in a modern version. I recommend:
http://www.librarything.com/author/brandtleslief

For example, Leslie F Brandt translates Psalm 10:
====================================
Where in the world are You, O God?
Why do you run away when things go wrong?
The sensualist lives by the desire of the flesh.
The materialist seeks for temporal security alone.
The ungodly man indulges in self-worship;
He assumes that "God is dead."

The point is, these are the ones who seem to prosper.
They laugh in scorn at those who are inclined towrds piety.
They claim that they are in the driver's seat and cannot be dethroned.
They live and speak arrogantly and carelessly.
They are not concerned about the enslaved and the deprived.
They will take want they want irrespective of the hurt they cause others.

Wake up, O God! Come out of hiding!
How can you allow these God-defyers to get away with it?

THE THE PSALMIST AFFIRMS
O God, you do take note of those in conflict.
You will take account of the godless and the arrogant.
You are still Lord over all the world.
You do hear the cries of those who love you;
You are perpetually concerned about their needs.
You will enable them to stand up to the pain and oppression of this life.
================================================

The Power of Truth or God-in-Action is the vibratory force pervading everything.

Man is a Soul having a body, and this Soul is the mover of the body-chariot.
The eternal soul principle is described as Sruti (that which is heard) in the Vedas;
as Udgit (The Song of the Beyond) in the Upanishads;
as Akash Bani ( Voice or Music from the Sky) in the Hindu scriptures;
as Kalma or Kalami-i-Kadim (Divine Utterance or The Most Ancient Call) in Al Quran;
as Sraosha by Zoroaster;
as The Word in the Bible;
as Naam or Shabd in the Sikh scriptures.
The ancients described It as The Music of the Spheres, while in Theosophy It is The Voice of Silence.

"Him alone I worship who is embedded in the Sound Current" Kabir

Sounds good (GØD-like) to me.
BTW, I have read most of your posts, with pleasure.

Interestingly, in Greek--the orignal language of the New Testament--the word for Spirit, or Soul, is Pneuma, which literally means air, wind or breath. From it we get pneumatics and pneumonia. In John 4:24 Jesus says to the woman from Samaria, "God is Spirit (Pneuma)". We get our word, spirit, from the Latin translation, spiritus. The Hebrew is ruach, the Aramaic (the language of Palestine in Jesus' day) is rooka, and the Arabic is ruh. All refer to air, wind or breath.

The Hebrew word for Spirit -- ruah is a feminine word...
"My Mother the Spirit, the divine mother the Holy Spirit..."
Shekhinah, the Spirit of God... She bestowed the dinine grace upon the Prophets

BTW, I sometime spell it 'ruach' to indicate the gutteral. Regularly, I attend a Sunday fellowship www.pathwayschurch.ca which makes a deliberate attempt to acknowledge the masculine and feminine balance of life. In the community forum, I make a point of calling attention to this brainmeta forum . The follow rhyme came to me this AM.
==============================
Strong father sky and gentle mother earth,
Both are the Source of every kind of birth.
Our mother earth provides for us a home,
Beneath the sky and vast celestial dome.

For all of us, our sisters and our brothers,
For all our cousins, uncles, aunts and others.
The work begins with faith, plus hope and love
Within the heart, around, below, above.

There can be justice, and there can be peace,
There can joy, which never more need cease.
But only if the needed work gets done,
By all who live beneath the golden sun.

It seems to me that the onus would be on the one who would say that divinity is something, or that the word has a use.

Well, no. For omnipotence to enable divine onmiscience would mean that God would have the ability to do the logically impossible: He would look at the quantum state of every particle in the universe simultaneously (never mind the violation of faster-than-light information transfer), which would collapse the quantum states of every particle, and then put all the quantum states back to their pre-divine-observation condition simultaneously, and do this continuously through all time. We do not observe quantum states being collapsed and restored. Once a quantum state collapses, it stays collapsed. So omnipotence of that kind would also be a logical impossibility (to say it is logically possible is equivalent to saying all human observation is illusion, in which case all bets are off and there is no point in talking about philosophy). Philosophers generally agree that divine omnipotence does not mean the ability to do the logically impossible (a common example is to create a stone so heavy that He can't lift it).

The consequence of this is that philosophy in general is bunged up by any introduction of a concept of God. Philosophy is better done atheistically.

Corrolary 1: God cannot be omnipotent if he is not omniscient. As proven above God is not omniscient. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.

Proof:

Unbounded power requires unbounded knowledge to be effective. That is, any force must be applied precisely to be effective. Perfect precision in application of power requires perfect knowledge. Ineffective power is not omnipotent. If God is not omniscient, he cannot be omnipotent.

Corrolary 2: If God is not omnipotent, He is not God.

Proof:

By definition, God is omnipotent. Any being that is not omnipotent is not God. God is not omnipotent. Therefore, God cannot exist.

Rick, I recall that your name for all that is--physically, mentally and spiritually (or do you object to this being a category?), is Nature. Right? And I respect your right to your own terms

LOOK WHAT THE "DEVIL" is doing to GOD!!!!! in my 'puter. Are you one of his angels, Rick? Keep in mind, you showed me how to make the Ø
BTW, does Ø have a name?
================================================
I also respect theists speaking of "God". As a unitheist, I use G��œD (Poor old Devil. How come you leave my signature alone?) . . BTW, I sometime refer to art and music as being divine, but I don't commonly use "divinity". However, I have no objection to its use. Notice what the devil, in the computer, is does to do to G�D ( G�˜D ) Why does he leave my signature alone? Interesting.

I presume you have taken a peak at PROCESS THEISM
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-theism/
It is not afraid to speak about "God" as not being perfect, yet.

"By definition, God is omnipotent. Any being that is not omnipotent is not God. God is not omnipotent. Therefore, God cannot exist." I agree, Rick. This is what brought me to saying: GØD (See my signature) is existence, in the process of becoming complete.

IMO, all who choose to be moral, ethical and loving--that is truly act on the golden rule--are part of the happy process. The more we can encourage immoral, unethical and unloving people to choose to join the team--it cannot be done by dogma or force--and become part of the process, the more joyful the journey of life will be for all.

Logic is the foundation of science and philosophy, but it is not the foundation of Life.
Life is not logical, It is paradoxical !
One will never find the answers to the deepest questions through logic or philosophy, but through Inward Journey, Inner Silence, Awakening, Inner Clarity, Supra-sense...

Rick, is Atha right when he says that life is not logical; that it is paradoxical?
=========================================
Atha, would it offend you if I said: I think and feel that GØD is that which includes science, logic and philosophy? I find that all things having to do with the Inner Journey fits in quite well with even the little I know about science, logic and philosophy.

Rick's science, logic and philosophy makes him a physicalist. Well and GØD-like!
I trust that he is a moral, ethical and loving physicalist and I bless him for it.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/

The following link from STANFORD UNIVERSITY contains a massive amount of material on physicalism and its connection with philosophy, somatology, pneumatology, psychology, theology, whatever.
http://plato.stanford.edu/search/searcher....ery=physicalist

JOHANN GOTTFRIED VON HERDER
First published Tue Oct 23, 2001; substantive revision Thu Sep 27, 2007.
I find the following very interesting and important stuff:
=====================================================
Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803) is a philosopher of the first importance. This claim depends largely on the intrinsic quality of his ideas (of which this article will try to give an impression). But another aspect of it is his intellectual influence. This has been immense both within philosophy and beyond it (much greater than is usually realized).....For the rest
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/herder/#PhilRel

But there can be some sort of waves we never heard about (or something we have not even invented a Word to describe it), which can impart to any point of the universe any information about any quantum fluctuation and quantum state without violating the Unobservable limits within limits of Human understanding of the reality.

Your statements rely on non-scientific argumentations Rick.
It is rather Sophism than anything else!

You absolutely excluded cybernetic approaches from your ruminations concerning omniscience of God, besides that you fully ignored EPR paradox related aspects of data
transfer from one part of the Universe to another.

Let me here advocate God on his behalf and protest against such approaches.

God does not play in Casino Royal Rick.

I think this next statement is rather non scientific




So having stated a scientific theory, you are suggesting that Rick is deliberately playing a deceptive card.
Would that put him on.......... "Team Antichrist"?


You might take a number along with others who believe they are speaking for God, invested in Gods best interest as defensive counselor, but.....................
How about you admit you speak on behalf of your belief that God has put "himself" in a position, is unable to defend "himself," and... has created you for this immediate purpose.

God not only plays the game, God invented it.

I am talking with Rick, not with you Joesus. I absolutely do not want to discuss with you anything. I think I made that point quite clear. Is not it?

Then stop discussing anything with me, its as simple as that.

Most probably, if you have feelings about something it won't make it go away.

Are you also against any other who might comment on what you have said to Rick on this subject, or is it just me you have difficulty with?

Regardless, it doesn't matter what you think of me personally or whether you have a hissy fit about who posts in light of your presence. Life will continue to bring you what you what you need.
Unless you want to be a victim to God then I suggest the only recourse is to expand your self beyond your separation and judgment.

Or you can isolate yourself and anyone else who wants to isolate themselves with you in some private conversation.

By the way hows that private forum idea panning out? Lots of exclusive conversations?

Our exclusive cozy Pantheon of Deities enjoys nice tea parties during discourses about cabbages and kings. Without your holly presence we discuss great secrets of the Universe and cobweb global conspiracy against Monotheism.

Holly presence? is that a Christmas-like presence?

You like to play with cats as I see Joesus.

They're simple minded, get distracted easily and sometimes they're fun to play with.

They are wonderful, wise, nice and cute creatures.

Well the wisdom part must be why they like me so much.

what's funny is that through our modern science we can't figure out how to cure Cancer, Aids, travel across the galaxy or to distant galaxies etc. but can somehow "prove" or "convince" ourselves/others that God does not exist. We are talking about God right.

Sk1. You comment What is your concept of 'God'? Keep in mind, I am just seeking to understand what you have in mind. I like to dialogue, not debate.

Speaking of cats. Enki have you heard about cats that look like Hitler?
http://humor.about.com/b/2006/06/14/hitler-cats.htm
Or like this?
http://www.catsthatlooklikehitler.com/cgi-bin/seigbest.pl
http://www.funnycatpix.com/_pics/white_ninja_cat.jpg

When I lived in Labrador, I once had a cat that looked like this:
http://www.greatdreams.com/Sylvester.JPG

We called him HOLY. However, he did not have a red nose, he had an interesting but not an angry face, and the white of his face spread down and across his chest and looked like a holy cross. Now you know where he got his name.

Your right, it's fun to dialogue.

To me God is:
the trees that sway in the wind
the love between me and another
the connection between me and my dog
the connection between me and my plants
I believe God is the ultimate Love
Male, Female, and the perfect blend of the 2
With and Without form
Incomprehensible
the list can on forever
but i think you get the idea.


I feel that as human beings we can not and will not be able to understand all of God
We are not that limitless in our thinking and we never will be.
I don't think we have the capacity to do such a thing.
But to me that's not important, to try an understand how we all came to be or how the universe was created.
That knowledge will never be "discovered" through modern day science, only therories will exist but never a complete proof.
We just need to take care of each other and our earth and try to love ourselves and others as much as possible. That is tough to do but it's much more attainable than trying to figure out all the mysteries of the universe.

Sounds good to me. What you write fits in quite well with what I have in mind when I write and speak about GØD.

By the way, for Christmas my son and his family gave me Richard Dawkins' book, The GOD Delusion. For my 78th Birthday (January 14--the day before that of the late Martin Luther King's 79th) the family gave me Christopher Hitchens' book, god is not GREAT--How Religion Poisons Everything. Incidentally MLK graduated from Boston University, as a minister, in the spring of 1954. That fall, as a minister, I entered BU to do two years post graduate studies.

Interestingly, my son is married to a liberal-thinking Muslim. His wife is also a student of Sufism (Similar to what I call Pneumatology). He, his wife and children (18, 16, and 12) are all deep and rational thinkers.

WHAT GOD, BIBLE, THEOLOGY AND RELIGION ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
==============================================================
Naturally, I have not read all of both books, yet. But I have read much of what the authors, Dawkins and Hitchins say about the God, the Bible, Theology and Religion in which they have no faith to realize something is wrong. What happened, I wonder? Were they so unlucky as to run into nothing but bad teachers--including the boring kind--and bad examples? Or did they simply make up their minds not to listen at all, or hear only what they wanted to hear?

I am happy to say: Ever since ince I reached the age of reason I have never really believed in the kind of "God", "Bible", "Theology" or the "religion" in which they say they were raised. I attended "their funeral" long ago. I graduated from all forms of weak and sick religion, including classic theism, long ago. My experience at high school and university set me on the pathway of discovery to a universal, inclusive and progressive kind of religion, and to what I now call theological unitheism--similar to panentheism (do a wiki on these words).

Correct me if I am wrong, but both Dawkins and Hitchens make no mention of , panentheism--GØD in and through all that is, not a separate and personal being. Hmmmm!!!! I wonder, why?

Along the way, I have been helped by the writing of many constructively critical and analytical writers, including scientists, who have written positively about the role of healthy religion in helping build healthy persons and communities.

I name just a few who have influenced me:
==================================
1. The late Rev. Reg Rowsell, the minister--the minister of my church when I was 12 to 17
2. My teachers at http://www.mta.ca and the Atlantic School Theology
http://astheology.ns.ca/
3. Boston University School of Theology
http://www.bu.edu/sth/about/index.html

THE WORK AND WRITINGS OF
1. Dr. Harry Emerson Fosdick, (American, minister, professor, healer) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Emerson_Fosdick
2. Dr. Leslie D. Weatherhead (a British minister and psychologist)
http://www.eden.co.uk/shop/doctor_of_souls...1976_30744.html
3. Professor Alfred North Whitehead (Process philosophy and theology, mathematician),
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/
4. the Rev. Matthew Fox, (former Dominican priest , now an Episcopalian, writer, teacher
http://www.matthewfox.org/sys-tmpl/door/
5. Professor Marcus Borg, panentheist theologian
http://ww1.explorefaith.org/bio.borg.html
6. Dr. Victor Frankl, psychiatrist and deeply spiritual Jew
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/frankl/frankl.html
7. Dr. Karl Menninger, psychiatrist, Christian, author of, Whatever Became of Sin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Menninger
He along with his father and brother founded a famous clinic, now in Houston
8. Canon the Rev. Joseph Wittkofski, suthor of the Pastoral Use of Hypnotic Technique
http://www.durbinhypnosis.com/hypnosis_and...YPNOSIS%201970:
9. Dr. Milton Erickson, psychiatrist and hypnotist
10. The Rev. E.L. Crump, electrical engineer, minister and hypnotist, concept therapist
http://www.durbinhypnosis.com/hypnosis_and...YPNOSIS%201959:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_H._Erickson
11. Dr. William S. Kroger, Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, I have the book
http://www.amazon.com/Clinical-Experimenta...r/dp/0397500963
12. The late Dr. Scott Peck, holistic psychiatrist
http://www.mscottpeck.com/
13. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a visionary French Jesuit and scientist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin
14. Professor William James, taught at Harvard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James
================================================
I was pleased to see that, in his book, Dawkins does mention, all too briefly, the progressive ideas of Bishop John Shelby Spong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shelby_Spong
JSS is a retired American Episcopalian Bishop. He also mentions
the retired (2002) Bishop, Richard Holloway, of Edinburgh.
http://www.westarinstitute.org/Fellows/Hol...y/holloway.html

In December 2005, my wife and I were present at the Markham (Ontario) Theatre--it was filled--when Bishop Spong help a group of us--in cooperation with The Toronto United Church Council--launch Pathways United Church http://www.pathwayschurch.ca. Along with about 25 others we attended the first service--held in a room at a golf club--the first Sunday in January, 2006.

JUNG and FREUD
==============
Dr. Carl Jung, in my opinion, was more of a pneumatologist than a psychologist/psychiatrist. In the early part of his career he was greatly influenced by his senior, Dr. Sigmund Freud, of Vienna. All their lives, Jung and Freud had a deep respect for one another. Freud even wanted Jung to succeed him as head of the Psychoanalytic Movement. However, Jung, with deep regret, refused. His interest in human spirituality and theology led him in a more theistic--I would say unitheistic--direction.

He makes his position clear in one of his great books is, Modern Man in Search of his Soul. In it he writes about the value of healthy religion and the need for doctors and clergy to work together to help build better lives and communities. Once, in an interview on a BBC TV, he was actually asked if he--the son of an evangelical Swiss minister--believed in God. He responded: "I do not believe, I know."

I like that; and I can vibrate with it. I think of GØD as including all that we already know, all that we don't know, and all that we can possible learn to know--physically, mentally and spiritually. In my opinion, heaven is not a fixed destination; but a joyful and eternal journey to any number of destinations we care to choose, along any number of pathways we care to take.

In his book, Dawkins goes into no detail about the work of Jung. He simply quotes his statement about "knowing" God.

With the above in mind, think of the following:

HUMAN DESTINY
==============
In my opinion, the eventual destination of every human being, which could take more than one incarnation, is to be a philosopher, a scientist, an artist, or even a combination of all three.

YOU ARE, IF YOU WILL, A PHILOSOPHER
=======================
A philosopher is anyone who is willing, that is, one who loves wisdom--the wise use of knowledge. Think of every child, curious about life, as a natural philosopher. Keep in mind that loving and willing are one and the same.

YOUR ARE YOU A SCIENTIST
========================
A scientist is anyone who is willing--that is, one who loves--to experiment and to explore new and better ways of getting things done. Every move and sound the child makes is an experiment. Think of every child as a natural scientist.

YOU ARE AN ARTIST
=================
Artists are people who are willing to take action and to make a practical application of what they know good, true and beautiful, what they have found out works. Artists seek to find goodness, order and design--GOD--in all things. Every child is a natural artist.

SEEK AND YOU WILL FIND YOUR DESTINY
===================================
This destiny is open, not just to the select few, but to anyone--at his or her own level, regardless of age, race, colour or creed. This destiny is open to all who choose to receive and to give faith, hope and love and who encourage others to join in as members of the family and larger community.

God is simply everything, and a huge percentage of that is incomprehensible. Your right to say we will never know. Its impossible to say for sure without being there. Even our current theories on the start of the Universe are using current perceptions of data and geometry to understand the path matter and energy has taken, but how can we really know what the laws of physics look like when everything is at a single point of spacetime?

I've read the God Delusion, and he touches on several important things like 'cargo cults' and the mistreatment of people through religion. I wouldn't take Dawkins view that a child is mentally abused if the parents are implanting their own religious ideas on it, but I do agree all children should not be forced into religion. I think this simple act would create more belief and less retaliation, with our children being able to think for themselves more and adjust their beliefs as they grow.

What I don't understand is Dawkins use of the word Zeitgeist, which means 'spirit of the times'. Now using German language or not, I'd like Dawkins to explain his use of the word 'spirit' in a book about the rejection of the supernatural. Obviously its just a figure of speech, but so many things are, and yet the 'figure' fits the shadow perfectly. If you remove 'God' from the Universe, you have to fill that hole with something. Science simply cant explain the recursive nature of the 'Creator' - who created the creator - and who created that creator?

One major example of this rejection of parents religion is the lead singer of Guns and Roses, Axl Rose. His parents were christian zealots and refused to let him listen to Rock-and-Roll music. The rest is history!

I like your choice of words. Vibration and resonance seems to be the glue that holds everything together at the molecular level. Emotions seem to be tied into this resonance, so if you see a situation that reminds you of something happy or sad in your own life, that memory resonates within causing huge swelling of emotion. Do you think your family are trying to get you to stop believing in God Lindsay? I bought the God Delusion for myself and although I saw it as a brilliant argument for why organised religion is an abomination, it did not alter my own beliefs in the thing behind the ideas expressed in religion.

Lindsay

Thank you for the information.

I also like you saying, " I vibrate with it"

Music played a big part in my realization of God

When i really began to hear the music and the way it made me feel.

It kind of opened my "receptors" and I was able to feel these same vibrations in everything I came in contact with or thought. What i realized is that I can close these receptors to the vibrations at my own will. Not that i ever really want to, but no matter what these vibrations or connections are always there for me to ignore or realize.

It's comforting to know that no matter how much I might screw up or fail, the connection is always there.

Everybody: I have made quite a revision of my last post. If you have the time, check it out.

T_L, you ask: I presume you are JOE KING --the name of my oldest brother, and the late Joe King. (1906)

BTW, my children MUST be devout unitheists....OR ELSE!!!!! Out of the will!!!!!!

But seriously, my daughter--from the beginning--was a philosopher, scientist and artist. Now, on her floating house near Tofino, BC, she does all three. Thank GOD, GØD, G�D, G?D, God, G-d, gods, whatever, even Allah!!!!!!

sk1, My son, Turner (47), is a pro--all the woodwinds. Tomorrow evening, he will be performing at a SOLD-OUT concert--Markham Theatre-- We have tickets.

I THANK GØD for what the media calls "the poster boys of atheism".

And I am serious about this. I predict that this will lead to a lot of good dialogue about what it means to be fully human.

Quite funny indeed. Jumped to forum for few minutes, still quite busy to return. Hope you will like attached cat as well.