this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
136 points (99.3% liked)

Astronomy

5429 readers
1 users here now

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jeanofthedead@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (7 children)

If that ain’t the face of god, idk what is. So fucking creepy and beautiful.

[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago (6 children)
[–] jeanofthedead@kbin.social -1 points 2 years ago (5 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] MiddleWeigh@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't think science and "god" are mutually exclusive in any way. I'm not religious. And I don't see a face. But I can appreciate the grandness, the order and disorder, and also see something I'd call divine. If science, if everything as a whole, just being, isn't "god" I don't know what is.

[–] FlyingSquid@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We already have a word for everything. The word is 'everything.' No need to redefine what 'god' means to make it fit into the grandeur of the universe. It isn't necessary at all.

[–] MiddleWeigh@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hmm. I don't really like to use the term god, just for that reason. But "redefining god" is a weird idea to me, as everyone's idea of it is probably different. My "god" is everything, and I call it whatever I want, but usually I don't call it anything in particular. I'm just trying to state that that person's view of this picture seeming "godly" is not off the mark at all imo.

I guess my real issue, obviously it's not with you, is with the modern connotation of "god" as a sky fairy, when that's not been my experience with it at all.

I don't think there's anything wrong with talking about god, especially in this sense, and I don't see the need to interject that this god is actually science, when it's the same thing.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)