Fr God to have any meaning beyond some silly label attached to an otherwise sensible scientific concept, God has to be a cognisant creator of the Universe. As far as I'm concerned, that would mean that there was some purpose to what happens within it, which itself troubles me. Anything else is just detail. Omni-benevolence and such like can't really be tested because the get out clause "It's all part of the Plan" is essentially irrefutable, and I never like irrefutable arguments. They aren't worth having.
One definition I have read is that God is "The cause of all causes"
To me God is a 'filler of gaps in our knowledge'...
For the ancients, "something" made the Sun rise, made the Moon glow, caused the seasons to turn from one to the another, created the earth...
Although I don't believe that Science knows (even nearly) everything, it is beginning to ask he right questions.
I don't think there's much point in atheists like me in replying to this. naomi was trying to get those who think like khandro to elaborate where khandro himself chickened out. So far not much illumination.
Chakka, you have a valid point, the theists that do bother to turn up are such a disappointment. You have to admit that it must be very discouraging for them to only have one argument to justify their belief, which is of course 'because I do'. Sad innit.
// wyedyed, how do you fill a gap with nothing? //
A good question Jomifl, I think the argument goes something like: "I don't understand the mechanism by which it works, therefore God must be controlling it"
QED ;-)
Wyedyed, ^ :o) Is it possible to put nothing where nothing already exists?What is really sad is that the theists not only don't bother to understand the world around them but if anyone else does it is seen as some sort of insult to their god (which I suspect is really an expression of their ego but cleverly distanced so that they are not seen as being responsible for the things that are done in his(their) name).
/Why do you want my thoughts.. /
It's a discussion forum, where people express their thoughts and attempt to explain how they cameby them. I don't think the thoughts of mohammed really qualify as he is not able to explain them and no one else can.
Keyplus, I don’t particularly crave your thoughts, but you chose to contribute on behalf of Mohammed and we already know what he claimed to think. It comes as no surprise that you have nothing original to offer.
God is a crutch for those unable or unwilling to stand on there own two feet or do not have the common sense to study their "God" and make an informed decision.