God is Not a Person

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


I noticed you did a search on "god is not a person", yet you make no mention of having searched "God is a person", why so?

[There is a] statement made by the author of the Letter to the Hebrews: “In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world ” (1:1-2)….. Here the Word finds expression not primarily in discourse, concepts or rules. Here we are set before the very person of Jesus. His unique and singular history is the definitive word which God speaks to humanity. We can see, then, why “being Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a definitive direction ”.…. “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us ”(Jn 1:14a). These words are no figure of speech; they point to a lived experience! Saint John, an eyewitness, tells us so: “ We have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth ” ( Jn 1:14b). ….. Now the word is not simply audible; not only does it have a voice, now the word has a face….(Verbum Domini 11-12)

Thought I'd leave you with that.
The Word of God is a Person Not Merely a Text




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I'm sorry that this concept is so difficult for you grasp. Let me back up a little.

I see GOD as a universal spiritual consciousness. Everything that exist is an expression of this universal GOD consciousness, that is created in the image of its immutable, ever changing essence. Existence in a continuous dance of the spiritual "GOD" consciousness in rhythm with the body of its creation.

We are also spiritual beings, that belong to the body of the universal spiritual consciousness that is GOD. Our bodies are our personal franchise of consciousness from which we peer out to observe and experience this dimension of co-created reality.

We are not our bodies. Our bodies temporary, corporal vehicles for our spiritual essence to enjoy and experience the body and soul of GOD.

This is my belief.

I am sincerely confused by your explanations of the person of the Old Testament and of the person called Jesus as being the totality of the essence of GOD, at a pin point reality of a certain place and time, within his own creation, but is not a part of his creation. And then, after all this bluster and show, blood and sacrifice, we are left arguing among ourselves, looking back at a wake of genocide in the name of these gods, and a future of promised destruction, judgment, wrath and hell, for those that don't believe the story.

I find it much more likely that there exists a spiritual hierarchy, of which those and other entities, such as angels, serve as teachers, leaders or missionaries to aid each individual soul/spirit through their journey. But I find any entity that claims to be THE supreme GOD, and demands worship or else, to be highly suspect, and my own "spidey" sense urges me to reject it/them, flat out.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Um... okay.

But none of that has any bearing on the topic at hand -- I don't really care what you believe, my question was how you resolve the logical paradox of "the creation is the creator."

Care to address that?



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


I'll take a stab at it... if you don't mind

Think of the "theory" of the big bang... everything that exists in the phyiscal world came from ONE singularity...

IF everything came from one thing... And nothing else existed at that point... That one thing was God, and is God...

Hows that?

Honestly i don't see this so called "logical paradox" you're speaking of




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


The topic at hand is "God is not a person."

I thought I addressed your question as to how the creator and the creation are one. But, I see that you still don't get it.

A ballerina becomes the dance. A violinist becomes the music. The creator and the creation are one and the same. They are inseparable. There is no separation between what is created and the creator.

I'm sure that you can find a box somewhere that will fit.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


That's the right answer -- it comes from God, but how is it God? How does God become the whole of his own creation?



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Sorry, you're missing the issue at hand here.

We know, from recent observations from the Hubble, that the universe is not cyclical -- it had a discrete beginning, and will have a discrete (and rather unpleasant, lol,) ending.

So, if it has a beginning, we know that there is a point at which there was nothing ("pre-beginning", if you will) and a subsequent point at which there was something (the energy that became the Big Bang.) Now, we don't really know what there was between those two points (theists, of course, posit God's will in there,) but whatever was the causal source of the action that brought about that change, something from nothing, cannot be the "something", because in the prior state, it was nothing.

As a result, though one might make a number of claims as to the composition of the "something" (as in "It was created out of the substance of God") it is logically necessary that the creation, the "something", cannot be that which created it. Therefore, it can be logically demonstrated that pantheism is an invalid claim -- the creation cannot be the creator. It can be argued that it was "formed out of the creator", but it is illogical to claim that it IS the creator.

That's not a theistic argument, that's a simple logical proof.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


We do not KNOW that the universe is not cyclical. We don't yet understand the phenomena of black holes. We don't know that black holes aren't creating new galaxies in another dimension or that this dimension isn't the outpouring of a black hole.

Additionally there is "string theory," suggesting that dimensions exist simultaneously, side by side.

You make quite a leap suggesting that singularity proves that nothing once existed. It doesn't.

If GOD always existed, then nothing never existed. If GOD existed, and was all that existed then GOD existed as a singularity. GOD was/is everything that was/is; the creator and the creation are one.

It makes no logical sense any other way.


edit on 30-11-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Yes, we do know that the universe is not cyclical. Cosmological observations have shown that the expansion of the universe is accelerating. It is impossible, within the laws of physics, for the universe to collapse on itself if expansion is accelerating -- that would require either slowing expansion or accelerating contraction.

Anything else that you would like to insert into that equation, including black holes (honestly, no idea what you think that has to do with anything -- a black hole represents infinite density, it doesn't represent a "new universe") doesn't change the fact that, in about 16 billion years, this reality will tear itself apart in the "Big Rip", and it all ends in tears.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Oh good grief!

"Black Holes are the Engines that Create New Universes"

Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe

You can't prove that God is a person by saying that the universe is destine to cease to be. Such an assertion is just as mind boggling as the idea of nothing existing. Nothing will never exist! If the universe rips, which I highly doubt will happen, something else will happen. For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction.

You can't say that singularity, which is a theory, proves that GOD and the creation are separate entities, or that creation depends on GOD to exist.







Your leaps of logic make no sense.
edit on 1-12-2012 by windword because: add videos



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Akragon
 


That's the right answer -- it comes from God, but how is it God? How does God become the whole of his own creation?


Well... something can't come from nothing right?

So if he created ALL... then ALL was created from what existed... which was God, who was all that existed at the time of creation

Instead of thinking God created from nothing... i tend to prefer "God created all from himself"




posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
Your leaps of logic make no sense.


Your presentation of unbased theory in the face of facts makes no sense.

Discovery that universe is expanding faster and faster earns physics Nobel

Phantom Energy and Cosmic Doomsday

The expansion of the universe is increasing. It will end in a Big Rip, not a collapse. Deal with it.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by Akragon
 


Instead of thinking God created from nothing... i tend to prefer "God created all from himself"


Which is all well and good, but it does not result in a universe that IS God, because God pre-existed the universe, by your own declaration, and therefore the universe is not God, but is the product of God.
edit on 1-12-2012 by adjensen because: tag repair



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Whatever! There's more that we don't know about the universe than what we think that we do know.

Our foray into the universe doesn't change the fact that GOD is not a person that appeared on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating, demanding to be worshiped and threatening all kinds of trouble to those that don't believe in a book.

God is a universal spiritual consciousness that is expressed as the totality of all that is. That means galaxies, black holes, pulsars, nebulae, solar systems, as well as atom, quarks, leptons, photons, etal. God and universe are one and the same.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Very weird.

If you want to know what God is why not investigate the book where he states what he is instead of what other people say he is?



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Very weird.

If you want to know what God is why not investigate the book where he states what he is instead of what other people say he is?



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


Whatever! There's more that we don't know about the universe than what we think that we do know.


So, you ignore evidence in the face of your obviously wrong claims, and then you have the audacity to criticize Christianity?


Our foray into the universe doesn't change the fact that GOD is not a person that appeared on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating, demanding to be worshiped and threatening all kinds of trouble to those that don't believe in a book.


Well, given that you ignore the evidence of science, it isn't odd that you'd ignore the evidence of history.

The historical record shows that God, in the form of Jesus Christ, did indeed "appear on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating". That you don't like that, fine, but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen, any more than your not liking the accelerating expansion of the universe means that it isn't happening.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Because you have a stone-aged monarchical view of creation, you only see a God that is a king upon his throne, rather than it being the whole kingdom itself. But, this whole idea of God as the king of the universe was conceived for and by an unruly tribe of desert nomads.

Abrahamic cosmology is infantile, anthropocentric nonsense. It has little to no relevance today.

And where have you been? There is evidence of things happening prior to the "Big Bang", including evidence of prior big bangs, indicating a cyclical nature like Hindu cosmology tells us.

Cosmos may show echoes of events before Big Bang
Does the Early Universe Harbor Evidence of Time Before the Big Bang?
Evidence of a Past Universe? Circular Patterns in the Cosmic Microwave Background

Google the rest yourself.

Everything coming from nothing is a myth. The universe as a one time deal is also a myth. The idea that this is the only universe happening now is ALSO a myth. You can't have an experience in nothing because it is bereft of the experience itself. A void, on the other hand, is a different story -- it's akin to the emptiness of space, in which all things exist. A void is like the blank pages of a book, or a perfectly clear diamond lens, in which anything possible is made upon it's surface.

"I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there."

There was no "nothing" before the cosmos, in which a God snapped his fingers and created all of this outside of himself, and only this, to sit upon a throne and judge his bipedal creations upon a tiny, blue dot.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


Whatever! There's more that we don't know about the universe than what we think that we do know.


So, you ignore evidence in the face of your obviously wrong claims, and then you have the audacity to criticize Christianity?


Our foray into the universe doesn't change the fact that GOD is not a person that appeared on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating, demanding to be worshiped and threatening all kinds of trouble to those that don't believe in a book.


Well, given that you ignore the evidence of science, it isn't odd that you'd ignore the evidence of history.

The historical record shows that God, in the form of Jesus Christ, did indeed "appear on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating". That you don't like that, fine, but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen, any more than your not liking the accelerating expansion of the universe means that it isn't happening.


Might you point out where in the historical records it says God took the form of Jesus Christ?



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


Whatever! There's more that we don't know about the universe than what we think that we do know.


So, you ignore evidence in the face of your obviously wrong claims, and then you have the audacity to criticize Christianity?


What evidence? I think you just dismissed and ignored my examples. Yes, I have the audacity to question Christianity, why shouldn't I? I know it, inside and out. I spent many years as a Christian.


Our foray into the universe doesn't change the fact that GOD is not a person that appeared on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating, demanding to be worshiped and threatening all kinds of trouble to those that don't believe in a book.



Well, given that you ignore the evidence of science, it isn't odd that you'd ignore the evidence of history.


I'm not ignoring any evidence!


The historical record shows that God, in the form of Jesus Christ, did indeed "appear on planet Earth, walking, talking and eating". That you don't like that, fine, but it doesn't mean that it didn't happen, any more than your not liking the accelerating expansion of the universe means that it isn't happening.


I never said that in the universe isn't expanding. Where do you get that? But, can you show me an example of a black hole that expanding, rather than contracting?

We don't know that there isn't a "wall" out there, that will cause the expanding universe to bounce back, and to contract. We don't know! The universe is a pretty big place, ya know?



There is NO evidence that GOD appeared on Earth, wither in the form of Jesus, or the form of the guy who ate cakes and BBQ with Abraham and Sarah. This has nothing to do with what I like, or if I like the idea of a tiny god walking around demanding to be worshiped. I just don't believe it.





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join