Posted by Ned on August 02, 1998 at 22:54:21:
In Reply to: An Atheist Might Argue That.... posted by Otremer on August 02, 1998 at 09:38:19:
: If the concept of Divinity is not comprehensible to the rational human mind, it is an irrelevant concept to our natural cosmos and is therefore best ignored as an exercise in futility and a waste of time. Perhaps one of the most basic divisions I see between believers is the natural verses supernatural concept of Divinity. Most, though not all, of my Pagan friends see Divinity as natural and nature as Divine. Most, though not all, of my Judeo/Christian friends believe that Divinity is a transcendent, supernatural concept that finds expression in nature, though nature of itself, is not Divine. Besides the problem that an incomprehensable, irrational, supernatural Deity can become irrelevant to the material people of the material world, there's the old logic problem that asks if God is omnipotent, can he make a rock that even He cannot move. An answer either way illustrates the irrationality of omnipotence. To my way of thinking, for the Gods and Goddesses to be relevant to us at all, they must be natural inhabitants of my natural cosmos. If they are not, then we have even less in common than the human and the earthworm who do share a natural material existence. I find it more than a bit ironic that the Pagans, who are often associated with the supernatural in popular fiction, are the ones rooted in rational nature, while the Judeo-Christians tend to be the ones who's theology is based on the supernatural.
: Blessings of Lughnasadh to all,
: Otremer
"Perhaps", God is science not yet understood.
It's very hard to grasp a 4th or 5th dimensional
being in a three dimensional world. What about
a 100th dimension?