tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11930272.post6122173650155973540..comments2023-11-17T13:19:18.689-08:00Comments on Flower Essences and Healing Thoughts from Mama Love Organics: Divine Plan, Divine Play or Natural Selection?Sheryl Karashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15635959513382233406noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11930272.post-51632353673204339922009-10-01T19:38:06.151-07:002009-10-01T19:38:06.151-07:00I'm much too worshipful of nature and beauty t...I'm much too worshipful of nature and beauty to identify with nihilism.Bunnyslippershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731905636828894276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11930272.post-16371208199944943322009-10-01T12:12:37.332-07:002009-10-01T12:12:37.332-07:00The diversity of animal and plant species makes a ...The diversity of animal and plant species makes a stronger argument for random creation than it does for the existence of divine creation. If you believe we were formed by a random combining of elements, it's easy to imagine that the randomness would result in many, many different lifeforms. Some would die out because they were not compatible with the others, others would live because they were. <br /><br />The theory that we were created by a divine being holds that God had some purpose for us. If there was a purpose, why not just make one lifeform that was self-sustainable and leave it at that? Why bother to create so many species? Unless, of course, he was doodling out of boredom. But boredom and purposelessness doesn't fit with religious notions of God, so the theory is that <i>all</i> lifeforms serve a purpose. Yet many are not sentient beings that can worship God or make choices, so the only purpose they seem to serve is to sustain other lifeforms. Again, why bother? Why not make the beings who have volition self-sustainable?<br /><br />So, to my mind, the vast variety of species seems to make a better case for randomness.Bunnyslippershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731905636828894276noreply@blogger.com