Believer:
"I believe in something that is greater than I am, something that is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. I call that something "God". God is all-powerful; there is nothing more powerful than God. God knows everything. God is everywhere."
Scientist/pantheist:
"There are many forces and powers in the universe, such as gravity and electromagnetism, to name just two. The universe is pretty potent. In fact, by definition there is no potency at all outside of the universe. Which makes the universe omnipotent.
"Omniscience? Well, by definition nothing is known outside of the universe. There is no knowledge, data or information outside of the universe. There are no knowers outside of the universe. Everything there is to be known is known by the knowers of the universe. The universe is omniscient.
"Omnipresence? Well, by definition all places are in the universe. There are no places outside of the universe. There is no presence outside of the universe. Everything present in the universe is present in the universe. There is no place for presence to be other than in the universe. The universe is omnipresent."
Believer:
"So we don't really disagree about the facts, do we? We only disagree about which labels to apply."
(With apologies to Richard Dawkins. Actually, I'm a great fan of your work. I'm just being provocative: taking a leaf from your book!)
I'd say that labeling indeed is the greatest part of the problem. How embarrassing to think that all this time we've been fighting over labels. Humans--we're so stupid!
Hi Lily, I think we're stupid and clever at the same time: the divine paradox! Thanks for your comments. MM
Comments? Come on... gimme your best shot!