It doesn't matter how you, or I, or MrGordon, or watsup describe God, collectively we know nothing about the nature of God. Religion and science can't prove or disprove God. But we can by investigating the realities of science and the personal experience described as spiritual, to then surmise that it is fair and reasonable to suggest that some higher consciousness is in play, without which we have to conclude that nothingness placed an overwhelming creative process into every aspect of natural order.
It doesn't matter how much we understand the laws of nature, why the hell does chaos, or nothing, or nature without consciousness even have or require laws. Laws are applied to achieve balance, cohesion, reciprocity. Does it not tickle your curiosity that natural order firstly exists and then imposes perfect laws to enable life and constancy. In fact the universe is vehemently oppose to imbalance and seems to have deliberately set about to habitation zones.
Too many WHYS here to just flip-off a higher consciousness.
It is your right to make no claims of a God, even in the broadest sense of what God might be, but then you are stuck with science and science is like a wind-up toy in a box, it bumps into mystery one side, turns around and bumps into a mystery on the other side and repeats this over and over and over again, then rails at anybody that suggests that the mystery is a superior consciousness.
Consciousness arose out of matter, out of non-consciousness and yet it can't exist in an abundant free-form?
