Quote Originally Posted by BlueBlazer
pepurr, your concept of god sounds more like the concept of the Tao.

I obviously don't have a problem with that concept, but what difference is there to us in our daily lives between a non-personal god and no god?
The only difference to us in our daily lives between a non-personal god and no god is the difference we as individuals choose to put on it. For them who believe there is no God, there is no God. Then they return from whence they came, same as all the rest. Hopefully they return happy in knowing they are one with all.

Quote Originally Posted by BlueBlazer
In my 1st post, I was going by the definition of the cognizant, personal god embodied in almost all religions. Any god belief involving a god who cares about the latest dominant species on one planet out of more planets than grains of sand on the beach is not logical. In my humble opinion.
True, it is not logical, and God can not do illogical things. If God loves one, how could God not love the other. God made them both of him self. By loving one and not the other, God would not be loving himself. A house divided can not stand.
pepurr Reviewed by pepurr on . Philosophy of Religion Today in my phil of religion class, my professor posed a simple question: Is it rational to believe in God? Me, I say no. Since rationality is a product of rules of the human mind, and since God exceeds the limits of the human mind, then God also exceeds rationality. Give your opinion and back it up with a logical argument. Rating: 5