One of the worrying things about the way people approach God is the assumption that nature and God are somehow the same, but this is to have a naive moment. Nature has its own rules and at best might be seen as a creation of God, but is not the source, evidence, or even the actuality of God.
The myth is that God created the world and he saw that it was good. We can reject that idea, and say that the world could be much better. We even have the imperative to make the world a much better place. Indeed, it seems that we have a role from God to make our world within nature much better and to work with nature and our own natures to improve upon them. The end of the story is not that we are a product of God, but that we are potentially capable of producing good, and bettering the world that we live in.
It is doubtful that nature, as we see it now, is more than a very minor aspect of what we might conceive of as a God-based or a God-driven world. A world that includes God would be better, and we see that nature is not very good. We can work with nature to make it more like what we would interpret as good or benign. God's natural world is neither good, nor benign, even though we exist within it and derive most of our experience from it.
What we have experienced as the presence of God, or would create for ourselves as an image of God has what might be seen as natural aspects, but that is because of God's association with nature. What we see as nature is not the end product of God. If we thought that, we would probably become faithless.
The reality is that if we were to interpret God through nature, we would become very peculiar entities. This is because nature is so closely associated with creation, the materials of creation, the tools of creation, and our own participation in limited acts of creation, reproduction, and 'above all' imitation.
Our nightmare is that we have invented God to meet our need for a God without the proviso of knowing that the God we have created is our myth and not really God.
