(February 13, 2015 at 8:26 pm)Lek Wrote:(February 12, 2015 at 11:18 pm)Jenny A Wrote: That was me. You see babies do have some indication of a mother, which is not surprising since there is one. But we have no indication of god, probably because there isn't one.
You're right we do believe that have babies have an indication that there is a mother because they can hear her. People have always had an indication there is a god because they can recognize him in nature.
Really, what is it about nature that suggests a god? The red in tooth and claw part? Disease? The vast amount of empty space in the universe? Beauty. Complexity. What? Because none of them indicate a god to me.
Frankly, it is not nature exactly, but man's lack of control over nature that seems to have caused man to invent gods, as a way of influencing nature. Unlike Christianity, earlier religions were not so much about morality or creation as about how do we: win this battle; make it rain; save this man from dying; safely sail across this water; survive the winter; get a deer; have a child. The idea was quid pro quo, we do this for x god and he gives us y. As a method, worshiping the gods didn't work very well. Having tested that hypothesis and found it wanting, perhaps we could move on? ----- Oh yeah, we have moved on. And while we are still not really in control, we have a lot more control and predictive power than we used to. But that came of discarding the god hypothesis.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.