What would be nature's moral values and worldviews? (worship, quote, God)

[Vic235]

Since religious people think everyone in the universe worship something. Following their logic, for those who do not worship Gods, are there anyone worshiping nature? What would be nature's moral values and worldviews?

Is there any nature's second coming, rapture? Does nature repent?

[TRANSPONDER]

Because nature tends to generally look pretty or impressive at least, there has been this view that it is Very Good so God mustha dunnit, and so, 'nature' is to be seen as a huge Alpha Course poster: 'Another triumph for the God administration'.

In fact it is not too nice with competition, extinction, the killing of cubs so as to make the females fertile and the targeting of the young or feeble as they are easier to catch. It is what we'd expect from Natural selection which generally places survival of the individual above anything else, with the immediate tribal group coming a close second.

But, as I say, it all looks pretty if one ignores the war to the death of the termites in the grass and shugs off the squeal in the thrashing bushes and the sound of rending flesh. Even volcanoes, Tornadoes and earthquakes are at least, impressive and, if they kill a few people, the theology of Sin will probably do to explain that away, provided one doesn't ask too many questions.

Similarly, since it all looks quite nicely restful with not too many humans about, when they get together it's easy to sniff at the clamour and bustle and tell yourself that the human way is not so pretty as God's would be in the 'Last days' leaflets with just a modicum of humans to play with the Lions in a perfect world and never mind the problem of overcrowding in a world without family planning.

So it was easy for St. Francis to hear in the twitter of the birdies screaming 'Stay off my patch or I'll scrag you' the praises of the Lord by his creation, and to see in the flurry of famished beaks as he tossed unsuitable breadcrumbs to the starlings a reflection of letting little children come unto Him instead of the frenzied competition of evolution.

And he probably would have dismissed it all with a saintly smile, if you'd have explained it to him.

[Chango]

I think Nature's mantra would be: "If you run fast enough, I won't eat you."

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

Because nature tends to generally look pretty or impressive at least, there has been this view that it is Very Good so God mustha dunnit, and so, 'nature' is to be seen as a huge Alpha Course poster: 'Another triumph for the God administration'.

In fact it is not too nice with competition, extinction, the killing of cubs so as to make the females fertile and the targeting of the young or feeble as they are easier to catch. It is what we'd expect from Natural selection which generally places survival of the individual above anything else, with the immediate tribal group coming a close second.

But, as I say, it all looks pretty if one ignores the war to the death of the termites in the grass and shugs off the squeal in the thrashing bushes and the sound of rending flesh. Even volcanoes, Tornadoes and earthquakes are at least, impressive and, if they kill a few people, the theology of Sin will probably do to explain that away, provided one doesn't ask too many questions.

Similarly, since it all looks quite nicely restful with not too many humans about, when they get together it's easy to sniff at the clamour and bustle and tell yourself that the human way is not so pretty as God's would be in the 'Last days' leaflets with just a modicum of humans to play with the Lions in a perfect world and never mind the problem of overcrowding in a world without family planning.

So it was easy for St. Francis to hear in the twitter of the birdies screaming 'Stay off my patch or I'll scrag you' the praises of the Lord by his creation, and to see in the flurry of famished beaks as he tossed unsuitable breadcrumbs to the starlings a reflection of letting little children come unto Him instead of the frenzied competition of evolution.

And he probably would have dismissed it all with a saintly smile, if you'd have explained it to him.

Well written, Arequipa. You have eloquently expressed the major difficulty I have with this physical reality . . . "red in tooth and claw". . . that troubles me still. The consciousness I encounter in deep meditation has not provided me with any satisfactory answers (since I have to formulate them as Yes/No questions). My imagination has been insufficient to produce a suggested rationale for it that has received a "Yes" response. It is a huge stumbling block to my full understanding and acceptance of our animalistic reality. The stark contrast with the pure love and acceptance I encounter is a complete enigma.

[lifertexan]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

Well written, Arequipa. You have eloquently expressed the major difficulty I have with this physical reality . . . "red in tooth and claw". . . that troubles me still. The consciousness I encounter in deep meditation has not provided me with any satisfactory answers (since I have to formulate them as Yes/No questions). My imagination has been insufficient to produce a suggested rationale for it that has received a "Yes" response. It is a huge stumbling block to my full understanding and acceptance of our animalistic reality. The stark contrast with the pure love and acceptance I encounter is a complete enigma.

When the prey (rabbit) is a part of God and the predator (wolf) is also a part of God,then there is no conflict.There is only conflict and a sense of unfairness and cruelty if we try to separate the physical universe from God and formulate them as beings totally separate from God.