As science learns more and more about nature and cosmology, we at the same time create an image of how god or nature went about creating all that we see today. If you think of it as god and/or nature, then people of all persuasions can get in on the discussion. But you also have to accept proven science as the basis of that discussion.

Well, one of the first questions about thew image we have of god is, 'Is or was he/she/it intelligent'. As Harv has pointed out, intelligence is a human characterisyic that he prefers not to be in his image of god. But along with human intelligence goes the chance of being right or wrong, or making mistakes if you will. If god is intelligence in a human sort of way, sort of like the most intelligent person you have ever met, who could also look into everyone's heart- mind reading that is- seems to be a human capability for some-then that god must of made mistakes. And we merely have to look at the histrical record developed from science to ascertain if god has made mistakes. This presumes that the objective of gd and/or nature is to create an intelligent species.

My personal conclusion is that god and/or nature does make mistakes. Neither or both are far from perfect. I've mentioned several so-called mistakes that have been made in other posts, like anti-matter eating almost all the matter in the universe down to animals that eat other animals, and even self-correcting mechanisms- the flipping of the magnetic field and whatever it was that killed off the dinasaurs.

So my image of god is that god is fallible. Somehow I find that comforting. It appeals to the Greek in my name.

• I would say so... - rggarfinkle - September 4, 2001 - 01:58 UTC