I need some feedback on the assertion that Pantheists have proof of their god because their god is nature. This was brought up by someone on a forum after my response to a Creationist when I said that there is no proof for any gods (and alluded specifically to Abrahamic gods). The poster said that there is no proof for ANTHROPOMORPHIC gods - but then suggests that Pantheists have proof of their god because nature is god to them and nature exists.
Nature is all that is not artifice. If there is a God, then Nature (capital letter intended) doesn't exist, for all is artifice.
I have to look up stuff sometimes. Artifice is something I had to look up. By the definition I got I'm still not clear on what you are saying. I can kind of draw a conclusion or I could ask you to replace the word or define what you said in example form. Help me out here.
It's kinda self-explanatory, Jared - "artifice," "artificial?" Bogus.
But don't expect him to always make sense.
I see. The definition I read was a bit misleading. I sort of figured thats what it was meant. Thanks
Created, contrived, out-of-one's-head, fabricated....
Nature exists on its own. It just is. Artifice is made by someone. Just as "art" doesn't just happen; someone makes it. The terms are related. Artifice is the practice of making artficial things, man-made things as we normally think of it, though the religious person might say that God made the universe, in which case the universe is artificial in some sense of the word.
I think it comes down to:
"...but then suggests that Pantheists have proof of their god because nature is god to them and nature exists."
Sicilian lemon cheesecake is heaven to me, ergo heaven must exist. Works for me!
Sounds delicious :)
Who of what created Nature?
Perhaps they are atheists and just don't realize it. Science studies their god, so science should be their "religion".
ok i have found the best response;
"if we are going to say god is nature ,why dont we just use the word nature"
yes...I believe in nature (if we leave out the mother.)