Wayne Dunlap

“The question of God’s existence is irrelevant, but if for some reason it needs to reveal itself unto me, I bet it could hook that up.”

Exactly. If a God who created the whole universe wanted to be worshipped and in a special way, it only makes sense that he would be able to make that wish known. Instead we have numerous different kinds of religions and many different sects within a religion like we do with Christianity. What does that tell you? Also, we are assuming, that, if a God exists, this god is the only one.

If God is almighty and all powerful, and leads an existence in the Universe beyond my ability to perceive it, then the most responsible approach I can take towards this thing beyond my perception is to shut the heck up about it, and focus on our collective worldly life.

So, maybe “God does not exist within my perception of reality.”

Or perhaps, “The question of God’s existence is irrelevant, but if for some reason it needs to reveal itself unto me, I bet it could hook that up.”

Or more modesty? “I have been unable to perceive the existence or intentions of God. I do think that Faith is important, and I put my faith in humanity, which tests my faith as surely as God tests the faith of its believers.”

http://dannyman.toldme.com/2010/01/08/oh-god-whatever/

I just checked the believing agnostic site and see you left a comment. Thank you. I also noticed a couple of others from this site too. Much appreciated.

I’m perfectly happy saying that we don’t currently have a good explanation for abiogenesis, or the rotation curves of galaxies, or a million other things. I’d like science to try to figure out explanations for these things, but I’m comfortable not having everything figured out.

Makes sense to me. I agree. I also agree that we probably have gotten to the point that we would be saying the same thing over and this is probably a good point to cut it. Thank you. I really enjoyed this discussion. If you haven’t done so already, could you please check out my friends blog, http://www.thebelievingagnostic.blogspot.com/
He just stated it last month and would be thrilled if you would leave a comment. Thanks. Wayne Dunlap

Interestingly, Nathan (a Christian who sometimes leaves comments at this site) doesn’t distinguish between things that “God did” and things with natural explanations. He considers God as having done and been responsible for EVERYTHING.

Yet I’m sure that whatever Nathan says, he does make some sort of distinctions. I’m sure that if his car breaks down a day after he gets it back from the mechanic, he doesn’t accept “God did it” as an explanation from the mechanic.

You and most atheists want everything to be nicely figured out by science, and I understand that.

No, no, no, no, no! And another “no,” for emphasis. As I said in my last post, science does not explain everything, and I don’t expect it to. I’m perfectly happy saying that we don’t currently have a good explanation for abiogenesis, or the rotation curves of galaxies, or a million other things. I’d like science to try to figure out explanations for these things, but I’m comfortable not having everything figured out. I’m saying that filling in the things we don’t have explanations for with “God did it” isn’t actually an explanation.

This is an interesting conversation, and I don’t want to cut it short, but there seems to be something about our viewpoints that we’re not able to communicate to each other, and I’m not sure what to do other than just repeat myself, so I’m going to jump out of this thread unless you have any objections / suggestions. (If you want, you could try to explain why “God did it” can be called an “explanation” for abiogenesis, but not for the rotation curves of galaxies, that might help.)