In a previous thread I was astounded to hear the claim that Gods are not physical, presumably meaning they do not consist of physical matter. How any theist could actually claim to know that is a mystery, but never mind. The question being asked here is :-
Are Gods made from physical matter, and if they are not, then what are they made from.
If they are able to think and do stuff, then presumably they must be made of something.
By physical matter, I mean the physical stuff within our Universe from which everything else is made from, which includes atoms, sub-atomic particles, and to be fair I suppose we must include dark matter as well.
But there are other classes of things that undeniably exist, that are not physical matter as such, that perhaps Gods could be made of. Here is a list of stuff that definitely exists, and thus Gods might potentially be made of :-
(a) Physical matter, including atoms, sub-atomic particles, and dark matter
(b) Electromagnetic radiation and other forms of radiation, energy and fields. For example, light and radio waves.
(c) Human (or animal) feelings, emotions, thoughts, love, hate jealousy, intelligence, stupidity, truth, dishonesty, spirituality and so on. All of these can be said to exist, but not in a physical form.
(d) Similar to (c), morals, legal or scientific laws, stories, information, principles, and so on. As with (c), all of these can be said to exist, but not in a physical form, although the media that encodes them may be physical, such as a book or CD.
OK. So what are Gods made from? Certainly not anything in the (c) or (d) category, which do not physically exist in their own right and are not capable of performing physical feats on their own. That is, it makes no sense to say that a God (or anything else) is made from love, or justice or logic or spirituality. These are attributes of something that physically exists.
I have heard it said that Gods are not physical, but spiritual. Spiritual is an adjective, an attribute of something that exists, so it makes no sense to say that a God is made of spirituality, any more than saying it is made of love. So sure, Gods probably are very spiritual things, but that says nothing of what they are made from, which is the topic of this thread.
So what is left? Within the realms of human knowledge, and Im not interested in just making stuff up, then I must conclude that Gods (if they exist) are made of the same stuff that everything else in the Universe is made of, being categories (a) and (b).
Anyone agree or disagree with the above?
Are Gods physical?
Moderator: Moderators
Post #121
[Replying to William]
not so it is a parenthesis view. With God always the creator yet recognizable in the creation. See Romans 1:20 for this famous idea , " we can know God by ,in the things that he has made".
Paul Tillich a Christian theologian wrote, God is the ground of existence. My God is simply too big for any one religion to contain.
not so it is a parenthesis view. With God always the creator yet recognizable in the creation. See Romans 1:20 for this famous idea , " we can know God by ,in the things that he has made".
Paul Tillich a Christian theologian wrote, God is the ground of existence. My God is simply too big for any one religion to contain.
Last edited by dio9 on Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post #122
[Replying to post 120 by ytrewq]
God can preform miracles and heroic deeds through people. As for my religions category, I'd say I am a Christian theist.
God can preform miracles and heroic deeds through people. As for my religions category, I'd say I am a Christian theist.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 16490
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 1037 times
- Been thanked: 1950 times
- Contact:
Post #123
[Replying to post 122 by dio9]
There may be folk who call themselves 'Christians' and have beliefs more closely aligned with Panentheism, but if they do not see that connection, and still wish to self-identify as 'Christians' then this does not mean that one cannot still identify the Panetheist therein.
I would wonder at why anyone in that position would find the thought of being a Panentheist something to be in denial about though...as the cock crows...
That is the Panentheist idea of GOD. Christian doctrine veers away from that idea of GOD because it interferes with their own established idea of GOD.
But - as has been pointed out - there are plenty of biblical references which altogether more than hint that the Panentheist idea of GOD is the correct one to adopt as nearest to The Truth.
That is what I meant, when I wrote; (esp in bold)not so it is a parenthesis view. With God always the creator yet recognizable in the creation. See Romans 1:20 for this famous idea , " we can know God by ,in the things that he has made".
Paul Tillich a Christian theologian wrote, God is the ground of existence. My God is simply too big for any one religion to contain.
There is little point in arguing what 'Christians' I am referring to as it is meant in the generic sense anyway.That is the Panentheist idea of GOD. Christian doctrine veers away from that idea of GOD because it interferes with their own established idea of GOD.
But - as has been pointed out - there are plenty of biblical references which altogether more than hint that the Panentheist idea of GOD is the correct one to adopt as nearest to The Truth.
There may be folk who call themselves 'Christians' and have beliefs more closely aligned with Panentheism, but if they do not see that connection, and still wish to self-identify as 'Christians' then this does not mean that one cannot still identify the Panetheist therein.
I would wonder at why anyone in that position would find the thought of being a Panentheist something to be in denial about though...as the cock crows...
Post #124
[Replying to William]
I am not in dental of my parenthesis belief. What I am not is pantheist.As I understand Pantheist says God is the universe. I say God is first and transcendent and all things resemble God.to greater or lesser degree.
I am not in dental of my parenthesis belief. What I am not is pantheist.As I understand Pantheist says God is the universe. I say God is first and transcendent and all things resemble God.to greater or lesser degree.
Post #125
ytrewq wrote:Anyway, your answer to the OP is that your God is not physical. I presume then that your God can't perform physical feats, is that correct ?
Hmmm. That does not sound like the God that most Christians believe in, that is capable of performing any physical feat he likes. So you are saying that God uses his people as robots under his control, in order to perform physical feats. Fair enough, but that limits his abilities very severely indeed. Can you give us an example of a physical feat that your God performed, in recent times, by harnessing a person? Also, you clearly reject almost all of the Bible, for the Biblical claimed feats of God clearly exceed what any person could do, whether under the control of God or not.dio9 wrote: [Replying to post 120 by ytrewq]
God can preform miracles and heroic deeds through people. As for my religions category, I'd say I am a Christian theist.
OK. So your God is limited to doing what can be done by controlling people, which sort-of explains you claim that your God is not physical, for I agree that a non-physical God is unlikely to be able to perform physical feats on his own.
But I'm fairly sure that other Christians have quite different beliefs. I'm getting the clear impression that no one has has the faintest idea of what their God actually is ....
To be honest, it seems to me that you (and some others here) are just parroting the Bible, without giving any real thought as to what you are saying, what it really means, and whether it makes sense. I love it, because there are many more people that read this forum than post to it, and they will be deciding what makes sense and what doesn't and shaping their religious beliefs accordingly.
Post #126
I am sometimes accused of asking hypothetical questions that are difficult to answer, because the question is hypothetical, and accept that the criticism can be valid. But I do try to be fair and non hypocritical, so let me put on my Theist hat, and ask a hypothetical question back to the Atheists. What if it was found that the Christian God really did exist, for example by finding that praying provided a positive outcome over and above that predicted by chance alone. What would those smug Atheists have to say about that?
As one who works in the field of scientific research myself, I have a very good idea of what would happen. First, there would be enormous, unprecedented interest within the scientific community, with a rush to confirm that the claim was actually true. The most likely outcome by far IMHO is that the original claim would not be able to be repeated, just as when Cold Fusion was reported, and that would be the end of the matter. But what if further experiments were conclusive - praying to the Christian God really did provide positive outcomes over and above chance. In that case, almost the entire scientific community would drop what they were doing, and turn their attention and resources to studying this new-found God. Then, imagine that the media, or the Theist, or anyone at all, was to ask what this new-found God consisted of physically. The answer, I feel very certain, would be along the lines of :-
"At this stage we have no idea - we simply don't know. However, rest assured that the entire scientific community world wide is investigating this God, and as soon as we find further evidence as to what it is and it's material composition, it will be reported in the scientific journals, and the information made available to the media. Until then, we cannot and we will not speculate."
IMHO, that is exactly the situation that Theist are in right now. They believe fervently that their God exists, but would be wise not to speculate beyond that which they have evidence to support. And that includes the material composition of the God that they believe exists.
As one who works in the field of scientific research myself, I have a very good idea of what would happen. First, there would be enormous, unprecedented interest within the scientific community, with a rush to confirm that the claim was actually true. The most likely outcome by far IMHO is that the original claim would not be able to be repeated, just as when Cold Fusion was reported, and that would be the end of the matter. But what if further experiments were conclusive - praying to the Christian God really did provide positive outcomes over and above chance. In that case, almost the entire scientific community would drop what they were doing, and turn their attention and resources to studying this new-found God. Then, imagine that the media, or the Theist, or anyone at all, was to ask what this new-found God consisted of physically. The answer, I feel very certain, would be along the lines of :-
"At this stage we have no idea - we simply don't know. However, rest assured that the entire scientific community world wide is investigating this God, and as soon as we find further evidence as to what it is and it's material composition, it will be reported in the scientific journals, and the information made available to the media. Until then, we cannot and we will not speculate."
IMHO, that is exactly the situation that Theist are in right now. They believe fervently that their God exists, but would be wise not to speculate beyond that which they have evidence to support. And that includes the material composition of the God that they believe exists.
Post #127
[Replying to ytrewq]
first off God doesn't harness a person to do his will. Remember free will? That's not the way it works.God simply is and a person can live in sync or not. Its a matter of good sense and free choice, rather than robot control.
first off God doesn't harness a person to do his will. Remember free will? That's not the way it works.God simply is and a person can live in sync or not. Its a matter of good sense and free choice, rather than robot control.
Post #128
Well that's not what you said in your posting #122, in response to me asking how your God performed physical feats.dio9 wrote: [Replying to ytrewq]
first off God doesn't harness a person to do his will. Remember free will? That's not the way it works.God simply is and a person can live in sync or not. Its a matter of good sense and free choice, rather than robot control.
dio9 wrote:God can perform miracles and heroic deeds through people.
-
William
- Savant
- Posts: 16490
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 1037 times
- Been thanked: 1950 times
- Contact:
Post #129
[Replying to post 128 by ytrewq]
Panentheism does not differentiate between the conscious being and GOD-Consciousness.
The robot aspect is designed to have challenges which the individuate consciousness has to adapt to in a GOD-like fashion (however that individual wants to interpret that as being) and in that yes - GOD is that which is within the biological instruments as that which allows animation (life) and data of experience through interaction with.
The differentiation is apparent to us through that experience, but how we each decide to interpret that is also a matter of choice.
WE see 'others' rather than 'all'.
Try 'pretending' that everyone you meet is an aspect of your-self and that is how GOD views it in relation to US all.
What is found there?
Well that's not what you said in your posting #122, in response to me asking how your God performed physical feats.
It might well be argued that our bodies are indeed kinds of robots.dio9 wrote:God can perform miracles and heroic deeds through people.
Panentheism does not differentiate between the conscious being and GOD-Consciousness.
The robot aspect is designed to have challenges which the individuate consciousness has to adapt to in a GOD-like fashion (however that individual wants to interpret that as being) and in that yes - GOD is that which is within the biological instruments as that which allows animation (life) and data of experience through interaction with.
The differentiation is apparent to us through that experience, but how we each decide to interpret that is also a matter of choice.
WE see 'others' rather than 'all'.
Try 'pretending' that everyone you meet is an aspect of your-self and that is how GOD views it in relation to US all.
What is found there?
Post #130
[Replying to William]
we have something in us called a conscience. One might call this a God directive. The conscience you might say is the program to do the right thing. but it doesn't force us , robot like , it only reminds us so to say. That's the way God is. Doesn't force people to do the right thing, but rather hopes they will.
we have something in us called a conscience. One might call this a God directive. The conscience you might say is the program to do the right thing. but it doesn't force us , robot like , it only reminds us so to say. That's the way God is. Doesn't force people to do the right thing, but rather hopes they will.
