Creationism vs. Evolution

[Patricius Maximus 236]

What I can't abide are people who have such a narrow-minded view of life as to discount all other views. Yes, there is an absolute truth in the world. Yes, there is one correct answer. But I've got news for you - nobody knows it. And we all try to find it out in our own way, but none of us are ever going to get there. And it's improper for one person to try to force their ideas on another, unless they have a really good reason. And so far, I haven't seen either side of the religious debate give a good reason for causing this whole mess.quote>

I agree with that. I don't attempt to force other people to accept my ideologies. I respect people's right to have their own beliefs. What we can do is present our beliefs and reasons for them, and evaluate other people's beliefs and ideas.

What needs to happen is we all just have to sit back, and chill out. And we really have to stop hating each other, because that's getting old.quote>

I'm an atheist. But I don't hate religious people just because they follow a religion. What I do hate is religious people trying to force you to adopt their ideas, and vice versa.

Now, I don't care how much you revere scientists, they are, before their lab coats, beakers, and equations, human beings. Human beings are greedy, jealous, and stubborn. Nobody wants to admit they are wrong, and when you base your entire career on being right - like scientists- that is even more true.quote>

That is why there is more than one scientist. One scientists discovers something, and may have complete faith in it. However, others don't, and as such evaluate the validity of different hypotheses. That is how it works.

Also, since we cannot consult anything superior to Humans for knowledge, we have to do the best we can ourselves to discover the secrets of the Universe.

Faith is a religious conceptquote>

Actually it is not. The vice versa is true. Faith is complete belief in something with or without evidence. Religion is faith in the supernatural without evidence.

Lets just cool down and let this tread die, before ST rips apart, over Religion, Creationism vs. Evolution, and other topics...quote>

That is why the Current Events forum was originally an experiment. An experiment to see if people can discuss political and religious issues civilly and without breaking ST apart. And the experiment succeeded. Members can be civil, and for the most part they have been.

- Patricius Maximus

[Boggy1 45]

Anyone heard of the Miller/Urey Experiment? For those of you who have not, this was an experiment that attempted to determine if the very first life could have been created in the tide pools of the young Earth. It attempted to simulate the conditions of the planet's atmosphere billions of years ago.

Anyway, the experiment was commissioned back in the 1950s, and within a week, the experiment had already yielded several organic compounds out of the inorganic elements.

As for the recent news, scientists this week have re-analysed the sealed vials that were left over from the experiment, and some vials which hadn't been analysed at all. In one of these, a vial that was simulating the conditions inside a volcano, they found a far higher concentration of organic compounds than expected, including 22 amino acids, 5 amines and many hydroxylated molecules.

Obviously, this is far from any sort of life, but already we can see that the formation of organic compounds must have been very common, and given enough time, these must have developed into micro-organisms...and eventually life.

[fukuda 351]

note that amino acids found in living cells are left-handed and those produced abiologically are right handed, that was a serious concern about Urey's experiment

the 2 optical isomers of alanine

[Sam 163]

Very interesting that the original experiment was more successful than was realised at the time.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: fukuda note that amino acids found in living cells are left-handed and those produced abiologically are right handed, that was a serious concern about Urey's experiment quote>

Well, today they're left handed. That doesn't necessarily mean they were a couple biliion years ago.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: fukuda note that amino acids found in living cells are left-handed and those produced abiologically are right handed, that was a serious concern about Urey's experiment quote>

Well, today they're left handed. That doesn't necessarily mean they were a couple biliion years ago. quote>

Maybe they weren't more than 3 billions years ago, but they were left-handed a couple billions ago as all living forms, be it archaea, bacteria or prokaria, use left-handed amino acids, so presumably LUCA had them too... But well that's another topic

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: fukuda

Maybe they weren't more than 3 billions years ago, but they were left-handed a couple billions ago as all living forms, be it archaea, bacteria or prokaria, use left-handed amino acids, so presumably LUCA had them too... But well that's another topicquote>

Okay, but that is a presumption. It's possible the shift occurred a bit later on and all the right handers simply died out since the left handers had an evolutionary advantage due to it.

And even then, it's still possible that the change occurred within LUCA itself.

So the abiotic processes producing the wrong enantiomer doesn't disprove anything.

[TheJerseyDevil73 13]

I can not wait until such a debate is null.

When one day societies and people can finally outgrow the fantasy of religion. May be it what you yourself think it is.

Problem is I won't live long enough to see such a day.

And to think some people have the odasity to say the world isn't flat yet still believe in burning bushes telling them what to do or the temptations a talking snake can impose.

I'll never understand how anyone can be so narrowminded.

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: Duke87

So the abiotic processes producing the wrong enantiomer doesn't disprove anything.quote>

I'm not trying to disprove anything o_O

I was just talking about some still obscure parts of it, you don't need to be so defensive....

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: fukuda

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: fukuda note that amino acids found in living cells are left-handed and those produced abiologically are right handed, that was a serious concern about Urey's experiment quote>

Well, today they're left handed. That doesn't necessarily mean they were a couple biliion years ago. quote>

Maybe they weren't more than 3 billions years ago, but they were left-handed a couple billions ago as all living forms, be it archaea, bacteria or prokaria, use left-handed amino acids, so presumably LUCA had them too... But well that's another topicquote>

I think there are a few among the bacteria that are not left handed, I'm not sure, but you'd need someone familiar with microbial biochemistry to explain which and why.

There are a number of pressures that may cause one-handedness or the other to predominate from an initial mixture of equal proportions.

[Muck308 55]

Originally posted by: TheJerseyDevil73 I can not wait until such a debate is null.

When one day societies and people can finally outgrow the fantasy of religion. May be it what you yourself think it is.

Problem is I won't live long enough to see such a day.quote>

There will always be organized religions as long as people keep giving them money. Lets face it, with money comes power. But that raises a dilemma for me... Useless things are not neccessarily being done with all this money. Much of it goes to good use, which is the root of my struggle. A church, or any other house of worship, should be accessable. So why are they often locked at night? Also, I think it's great that so much charity is done by these organizations/ religions, but what good is it if you pass around a gold collection plate? Shouldn't you just melt the plate down and donate IT as well? 

And to think some people have the odasity to say the world isn't flat yet still believe in burning bushes telling them what to do or the temptations a talking snake can impose.

I'll never understand how anyone can be so narrowminded.quote>

 

Well first of all, you have to take the Bible with a grain of salt. Metaphors run rampant. I go to a catholic church (almost) every Sunday. A good priest knows  how to take what's in the bible and make it tangible to people of the modern age. And I find that extremely useful. The world moves in all kinds of revolutions and those stories/depictions can still be quite valid, they just need some translation. We already know you can't take the Bible 100% literally b/c of the things that contradict one another. The book was written over the course of many years. Well I assume it was, and obviously there was a gap between testaments.

So you can probably tell by what I've written hear, that I don't agree with everything within the Bible's pages... ie; by referring to "stories" and depictions. I'll tell you why.

I just cannot deny evolutionism. It just makes too much sense. Regardless if we are searching for a missing link... there are links missing all over.  But just b/c you can't prove something doesn't mean it isn't true, or at the very least probable.

However, just because I believe in evolutionism doesn't mean I will turn my back on my religion. I pondered doing so when I was younger and first began to question things, but after  years of being rebellious, I find it to be a waste of time. 

So I end up going to church, damn near every week... why? Because I don't see how any harm can come from me spending an hour a week in a positve environment. I see these people every week. I know their lives and they know mine. It also keeps me in touch with my parents. My mom isn't catholic, and doesn't go with, but I do meet my dad there. That's our time together. There and afterward when I go back to my parent's house for breakfast. Of course that has little to do with my faith.

To address that issue; 

Faith. Ok. Big subject. Like I said, I believe in evolution, but it doesn't scratch every itch. It leaves me feeling quite empty inside actually. And I think that reason right there is one of the big causes for organized  religion in the first place. (Organized religion was probably invented as a means of control... which is no revelation these days. Everyone  has heard it) Although lack of understanding is no reason to develope grand tales of how things came to be. I have faith because we as humans just seem too elaborate to not have come from something intelligent, and I know it sounds lazy, but I like to think that 'something' set the wheels of evolution into motion. I want there to be something after I die. I mean come on! We live these complicated lives and then we just die? It hurts way too much to even try to accept that. 

But there are other reasons why I go to church. Respect. I'm catholic, a religion that has made it's impact on mankind over the years. Catholicism has done some disgusting things over the years. And it is absolutely disgusting the way they have so much wealth and power. But that doesn't trickle down to me in the very least. The people in my parish (most of them) are good people with no hidden agendas or involvement in politics (although Jane Orie does go to my church and she was a senator). So I don't identify with the heirarchy of the church. I compare it to high priced corporate law actually. A bunch of jerks sitting around wasting everyone's time and money to argue points which can never have a unanimously agreeable answer given. So I don't respect those jerks, but I do respect my ancestors. My family has fought persecution over the years (not so much recently) (obviously) and well, it pretty much comes down to me. It's just myself and my cousin to carry on the family name. Now he is bisexual (and an atheist for that matter... which makes for great theological discussions between us!) He isn't sure if he wants to get married at all let alone to a woman... so it's on my shoulders. This puts me in a position of great stress, but also great power. I could single-handedly change the course of religion in my family. But that doesn't mean I should. I will maintain the way things have been done to a certain degree (although when I do have a family I hope I can present things to my children in an unbiased manner. It is their right to choose.) But I cannot discount what has come before me. I would be doing my ancestors an injustice to pass off their faith as fairy tales. 

Which brings me to the buffet. That's how I look at religion. It's all right there, underneath the sneeze guard. I can take a little of this or that. I can leave some behind. I can put one thing on my plate but I don't have to eat it. Nor do I have to eat it all. I don't even have to go in the building (but I did). I like to think I am tolerable of all religions, but it's hard.

Not to long ago I found myself very curious about Scientology. At first I found it to be quite ridiculous, and was even mad about it. How can they be so stupid? I would say... but then I was able to make some comparisons to other religions and it's all the same  really. Now, I have no intentions of joing their church, but I say live and let live. While the higher ranks of any religion may (in most cases probably are) be 'evil' or at least self-centered, the sheep at the bottom of the food chain are just people who want answers. 

There is only one religion I have come across so far that infuriates me. The Temple of the Black Light. They are pretty adament about people not publishing their beliefs, so I won't get into it... but if you google Temple of the Black Light... you'll find their website. It is a variation on Luciferianism, or Satanism. They, pretty much, are a bunch of jerks just for the sheer fact that they make up words (although so does scientology) to define certain aspects of their faith, and then tell the world that if they don't understand their made up words, then they must be , and I quote, "too feeble of mind" to comprehend. Hey, jerk store, can you comprehend this? "efbfsfnv d vrnv  enfjrebgb!" NO? You must be an idiot then. Ta ta.

So that's my struggle. Evolution makes sense. It really does. But regardless of what eveyone tries to shove down your throat... never stop asking questions! And if there is no grand scheme to the universe, then we can at least lament on our wild imaginations!

And if there are any members of TOTBL here, I apologize... but after reading what your beliefs are, I doubt you would actually care.

[Simcitymaster13 27]

What happen to Creationevolutionism The Word Created by Will Wright for Spore.?

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: sam

Originally posted by: fukuda

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: fukuda note that amino acids found in living cells are left-handed and those produced abiologically are right handed, that was a serious concern about Urey's experiment quote>

Well, today they're left handed. That doesn't necessarily mean they were a couple biliion years ago. quote>

Maybe they weren't more than 3 billions years ago, but they were left-handed a couple billions ago as all living forms, be it archaea, bacteria or prokaria, use left-handed amino acids, so presumably LUCA had them too... But well that's another topicquote>

I think there are a few among the bacteria that are not left handed, I'm not sure, but you'd need someone familiar with microbial biochemistry to explain which and why.

There are a number of pressures that may cause one-handedness or the other to predominate from an initial mixture of equal proportions.quote>

Well, peptide glycans forming bacterial walls and other non-protein complexes do indeed use some right-handed forms, but all amino acids that conform proteins are left-handed, as only left-handed amino acids connect to the ARNt to produce proteins in the ribosomes

[saltandsauce 0]

Originally posted by: TheJerseyDevil73 I can not wait until such a debate is null.

When one day societies and people can finally outgrow the fantasy of religion. May be it what you yourself think it is.

Problem is I won't live long enough to see such a day.quote>

well, you should come over here and find the pavlovs of the human race. nothing keeps them from doing what they want if they want to smoke their life and stab their way around. as much as you wish it could happen not everyone is a "rational sensible responsible human being" and it will never be. religion is a way of self-policing a society and bringing in a social centre - which these ares lack. it also gives a society a leader which again these areas lack. even as a Catholic i can draw holes in the second creation story which is Cain and Abel find wives out of nowhere?. and man comes earlier on in the second one but in the first he is the last made.

A good priest knows how to translate stuff from 2,000+ years ago where farming metaphors were used to a modern version (the homily).

or i could put it in others words.

Evolutionism- if you care about the subject

Creationism- if you don't actually care about the subject

Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich - Napoleon

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 7, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Muck308 55]

best of luck to you as well. I envy you a tiny bit, as I do most atheists. Most of what I know about atheism comes from discussions I have had with my cousin. He is a professor and belongs to some org. I think its called New York Atheists. idk, they are in NYC. Anyway, atheists tend to have a good strong hold on their rationality. When you can recognize that you believe in no higher power, you give yourself the chance to answer every existential question rationally. That is vital to finding truth, but, as an atheist, I would assume you have either far less existential questions, or totally different questions altogether. (than lets say a Christian).

I understand how you feel no closeness from any house of worship. I went to church for a long time and only got angry at the things they were trying to pass off as the word of God. Somethings should be left to individuals to figure out for themselves, or to ignore themselves. But after I realized that I don't have to agree with everything the catholic church does, going to church became easier, and I started to appreciate it for other reasons.

It's hard to some up faith in a forum post, but the one thing I have the most faith in is simply that I will succeed. I've got $1.23 in my bank account right now. I get paid tomorrow and that money is spent (rent, car insurance, and inspection stickers) But I have faith in the fact that I will succeed. Life is complicated and stressful, but I try to find the good side (or at least the humorous side) in everything... because it's there. I am not praying to God to help me with financial problems... that's just silly. I guess what you could say is mostly I have faith in myself. I think that's more important than attempting to please any god.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Muck308

It's hard to some up faith in a forum post, but the one thing I have the most faith in is simply that I will succeed. I've got $1.23 in my bank account right now. I get paid tomorrow and that money is spent (rent, car insurance, and inspection stickers) But I have faith in the fact that I will succeed. Life is complicated and stressful, but I try to find the good side (or at least the humorous side) in everything... because it's there. I am not praying to God to help me with financial problems... that's just silly. I guess what you could say is mostly I have faith in myself. I think that's more important than attempting to please any god.quote>

Good point here: faith doesn't have to be in something supernatural.

Having faith in yourself is a good thing. So is having faith in your friends and family.

But those are things that there are rational reasons for you to have faith in. You know them and you have grown to trust them. Faith in a god is a different animal since there is no rational reason for it - it's blind faith.

Basically, properly placed faith is good. Blind faith is bad.

I have faith because we as humans just seem too elaborate to not have come from something intelligent, and I know it sounds lazy, but I like to think that 'something' set the wheels of evolution into motion. I want there to be something after I die. I mean come on! We live these complicated lives and then we just die? It hurts way too much to even try to accept that. quote>

It was Sigmund Freud who said religion was a form of wish fulfillment: people want to believe in the existence of some higher power because the idea of there not being one scares them. What you're saying here sees to fit right into that.

I know a lot of religious people find their faith comforting. The idea that god is watching over the and that paradise awaits them gives them a good feeling.

But see, that requires a degree of humbleness that I simply do not have. From my point of view, the idea of there not being a god is comforting. Why? Well, because it then means that I don't have to follow any god's rules, waste time worshiping that god, and submit myself to doing his will. I'm free to use my mind to figure out right and wrong for myself, and to make my own path in life and choose my own destiny.

And yes, this means that I have nothing to look forward to after I die. But you know what? I wouldn't have it any other way.

Knowing that there's simply nothing is better than not knowing whether I'm going to heaven or going to hell.

Lack of knowledge is always scarier than knowledge of something bad. Because when you don't know, you can only fear the worst. When you know, at least you know exactly how bad it's going to be, and that it won't be the worst.

But again, completely different worldview.

[Muck308 55]

I know a lot of religious people find their faith comforting. The idea that god is watching over the and that paradise awaits them gives them a good feeling...

...Knowing that there's simply nothing is better than not knowing whether I'm going to heaven or going to hell.quote>

That's exactly why a lot of very intelligent people I know, who are also very religious, bug me. I'm sure they have had existential questions. I'm sure they pondered those questions here and there, over the months and years. And what did they arrive at? An answer identical to their respective faith? Doubtful. Everyone perceives the world differently, even if only slightly than the next. Which could alternately be credited to the blind faith you discussed, Duke. I imagine they start to have contradictory ideas and then remind themselves of the consequences of being wrong. ie going to hell. I don't believe in a hell or a heaven for that matter, at least not in the traditional sense. 

For example, I could easily find myself in a coma. Whatever my mind is occupied with for the duration could easily be interpreted as a heaven or hell. Words mean different things to different people. Heaven may mean fluffly clouds to many. That's always been the problem with a universal paradise. You all know. Ok, I'm outta gas.

[bobinator 0]

I have faith because we as humans just seem too elaborate to not have come from something intelligent, quote>

The counterargument to that is, humans seem too elaborate to have come from something intelligent.

[Patricius Maximus 236]

It was Sigmund Freud who said religion was a form of wish fulfillment: people want to believe in the existence of some higher power because the idea of there not being one scares them.quote>

Yes, psychological comfort.

I know a lot of religious people find their faith comforting. The idea that god is watching over the and that paradise awaits them gives them a good feeling. quote>

Those religious people are probably scared what will happen to them if there was no god watching over them.

But see, that requires a degree of humbleness that I simply do not have. From my point of view, the idea of there not being a god is comforting. Why? Well, because it then means that I don't have to follow any god's rules, waste time worshiping that god, and submit myself to doing his will. I'm free to use my mind to figure out right and wrong for myself, and to make my own path in life and choose my own destiny.quote>

I share your views on that front. It is the instinct of freedom and rationality -- the two things that equal progress.

And yes, this means that I have nothing to look forward to after I die. But you know what? I wouldn't have it any other way.

Knowing that there's simply nothing is better than not knowing whether I'm going to heaven or going to hell.quote>

Well, I don't believe in an afterlife, and especially not in a heaven and hell. Those two places were promoted by the Popes and churches as a way of scaring people into submission, and a vehicle for oppression.

Besides, if there were a god, and he judged 100 billion ignorant people for an eternity in heaven or hell, and sent the nonbelievers into hell, then that god would be worse than the worst dictator on Earth -- and that is hardly a reason to worship him, or to do his will.

Lack of knowledge is always scarier than knowledge of something bad. Because when you don't know, you can only fear the worst.quote>

Agreed. At least when you know something bad is going to happen, you can prepare for it or prevent it.

---

I have done a lot of pondering about life on Earth, and have made a lot of casual observations, and from what I have seen, I have determined that the Theory of Evolution is the most rational and correct theory about life on this planet.

There are still inconsistencies, but as with any theory, it must fit the observations, and Science does not claim to know everything -- in the future, these inconsistencies can be explained by some hitherto undiscovered process.

That is Science -- the seeking of greater knowledge through observation, experimentation, and the scientific method.

Humans like to think that they come from something intelligent, because that makes them feel special, superior, and exclusive of life on Earth. Pcychological comfort is the driving force behind these hypotheses.

The species Homo Sapiens is the current highest point in Evolution where sapience is concerned, and that does not mean that we are equal to the animals -- in some qualities we are superior to some, in some qualities we are inferior to some.

I am more inclined to believe in a rational process supported by evidence than believe that a supernatural omnipotent entity created us in his own image, and did other fantastic things, with no evidence to support it.

It is simply a matter of rationality and evidence.

A future without these irrational beliefs hampering progress is a far better one than one with these irrational beliefs governing the whole human species in an aura of traditionalism and dogma.

- Patricius Maximus

[Duke87 1,070]

Tidbit of philosophical input:

"Either god cannot abolish all evil, or he will not; if he cannot, he is not all powerful; if he will not, he is not all good."

    -Saint Augustine

It is a problem with the typical idea of god.

[Javascap 9]

People, please, there is a huge difference between evolution and creationism. Creationism explains (incorrectly) how animals came into being. The scientific study of the origins of life is Abiognesis.

Evolution simply observes the changes in life over the passage of time.

[Duke87 1,070]

↑ true. The two ideas do not directly contradict each other but at the same time that same book which teaches that god created the universe in six days also teaches that he created things as they are today, that no evolution of them has taken place.

Fundamentally, it's not evolution and creationism that contradict each other, it's saying humans evolved from a primate ancestor that contradicts creationism.

Or more specifically, Christian creation myth doesn't say that evolution can not happen, what it says that it did not.

It's a subtle difference but an important one.

[Patricius Maximus 236]

People, please, there is a huge difference between evolution and creationism. Creationism explains (incorrectly) how animals came into being. The scientific study of the origins of life is Abiognesis.

Evolution simply observes the changes in life over the passage of time.quote>

True -- I've seen some people wrapping in their idea of "evolutionism" to include abiogenesis, eugenics, abortion, and euthanasia. That is not what Evolution is, and all those theories and hypotheses in "evolutionism" are seperate things.

To clarify...

Evolution: theory that states that first life-forms evolved into higher life forms by mutation and natural selection, eventually reaching the present state. The forces of mutation and natural selection are still acting today on species.

Abiogenesis: concept which states that the first life-forms originated from non-living matter. There are many theories which extend on this concept, but so far no one of them has shown its validity over the other.

Both theories above are supported by facts, and the theories do fit them. Creationism and Intelligent Design hypotheses do not. Furthurmore, Creation hypotheses inevitably bring up a lot of philosophical questions that cannot be validated or invalidated by Science.

Simply put, the hypothesis of Intelligent Design has no facts supporting it, and it cannot be validated by the scientific method. Therefore, it is not Science.

However, I would believe in Creationism if a person could find a way to validate the hypothesis, show me experimental data that validates it, and if it fit the observable facts better than Evolution.

So far, no Intelligent Design proponent has shown me that proof or is interested in obtaining it. Whereas Evolution has been tested, validated, and fits the observable facts.

Now, back to the original topic.

Eugenics is not part of Evolution, as I stated above. To clarify...

Eugenics: a concept which states that it is desirable to improve the human species through various means of intervention. The intervention could be government-based (such as genocide, forced sterilization, forced abortion), or voluntary (birth control, selective in-vitro fertilization, reprogenetics).

Essentially, Eugenics is artificial selection, instead of natural selection.

[nihonkaranws 88]

Short and sweet: There is no generic proof of creationism. However, there is proof of evolution. So, what do you think?

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: nihonkaranws Short and sweet: There is no generic proof of creationism. However, there is proof of evolution. So, what do you think?quote>

Replace the word "proof" with "evidence" and you've basically got it.

[coolotter88 2]

creationists argue that the eye is perfect. but really, how can we say we are the product of God's grace when we're not perfect at all? The eye's imperfection shows that God didn't create us and it's a product of Evolution. If God created all of us, why would he invent myopia?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: coolotter88 creationists argue that the eye is perfect. but really, how can we say we are the product of God's grace when we're not perfect at all? The eye's imperfection shows that God didn't create us and it's a product of Evolution. If God created all of us, why would he invent myopia?quote>

 

Perfect is relative.

[safemining1 0]

I do believe in god, but I don't believe in creationism. Although, I wonder, what made the big bang (or other way the universe started, if it isn't infinite occur? That's up to science to find out.

I find it hypocritical that some atheists who think believing in god is such a "bad thing" or "totally blind faith", and that rational thought is superior or "smarter". Yet, they think theists "push dogma down peoples' throats", or other such things.

I do prefer rational thought and its methods, but yet, we can't always use the scientific method at every moment of our lives. Do you think I need to use the scientific method when I'm going to drive a car, just to make sure it will work? (Although for that, we can take our cars into an inspection, yay!).

I think arguing over creationism and evolution is wasteful and unproductive. There are more important things to focus on improving in our society, our world and the way we live our lives.

Personally, I believe god is interwoven in the very fabric of the universe. Basically, god=universe. This is a commonly held belief at the church I go to (and the amazing youth group I am a part of). There are some other subjects about god that I am undecided on (such as "divine order", or "all good, all powerful", yet we live a imperfect universe, at least in a subjective, sometimes narcissistic perspective).

But whatever. Life goes on.

Namast