If you perceive 'a spot of disgust' in my replies (in my replies? or in my questions?) then you need to lay off the hallucinogenic mushrooms, because you're seeing something that isn't there. Generally, it is to be expected that answers will have some bearing on the questions asked, so it should come as no suprise that a question will, to some degree, influence an answer. In this forum, great unbrage is oft taken if the reply fails to have some relationship to the question, said umbrage indicating considerable emotional anguish aroused by disappointed anticipation (known otherwise as an insistence of not 'sticking to the subject').
In the establishment media, 'sticking to the subject' is a rarely seen phenomenon, as various talking heads on both sides of the interview desk vie to promote their agenda and to blunt or obscure that belonging to the other fellow. But pay no attention to those folks. This is but one mark of their abnormality. There are many.
"We are discussing Him and Nature."
I thought so. Just the same, I sense in you a growing disenchantment with my questions.
"Be careful who speaks for Nature."
Aquinas speaks of God and Nature. It appears to me Aquinas asserted that God's Truth in any matter could not be contrary to the facts of the Nature He created (contrary to 'natural knowledge'). This assumes the requisite level of both knowledge and sincerity, which can be a big assumption, both virtues being of short supply among members of the human race. Still, that seems to be the choice of Aquinas, and I choose to follow his lead in that respect. As to the issue of who speaks for Nature: I'm not aware that anyone does with any great authority. Why? Does Nature require representation?
"Some of them think the Earth is alive and Trees should be hugged."
I am not numbered among them. To be sure, Earth may be alive in some philosophical sense, but hardly sentient, and, on a magnitude beyond our present abilities to express in any meaningful terms, Al Gore does not in any way approach the level of Aquinas .
"This is no joke."
Who's laughing?
"Excuse me the people are not joking."
About what?
"Their Theory requires more than a leap of faith."
Who is 'they'? And, to what theory do you refer?
I am truly sorry and appologize for causing such anguish in you or others.
I meant only to make comments coming from me that are related to comments coming from you.
My purpose ti to give good honest reason why it is to my benefit and your benefit as human beings to be acquainted with the Creator in such a way as to leave Him out of nothing that occurs.
It is also my considered opinion that it is of the Highest Disrespect to speak of and analyze a painting and make no attempt to indicate that we could even recognize the Painter.
This is probably not dealing with the Subject.
I am probably out of my depth in subjects. I will 'trip' on down the yellow brick road to speak to another Wizard.