The "place" of God ?

[JimL]

still waiting for your bank account info, since we are the same entity.

And I am still waiting for a thoughtful refutation of my argument. Do you believe that you are a distinct entity from that of the universe, that you are an entity that just happens to exist within a place that we call the universe, or are you and the trees, planets, stars etc. etc. united with the universe as parts are to a whole?

[Sparko]

And I am still waiting for a thoughtful refutation of my argument. Do you believe that you are a distinct entity from that of the universe, that you are an entity that just happens to exist within a place that we call the universe, or are you and the trees, planets, stars etc. etc. united with the universe as parts are to a whole?

Please quit stalling and send me your bank info. We are the same entity, right?

[JimL]

Please quit stalling and send me your bank info. We are the same entity, right?

Please quit evading the question. Are the things that exist in the universe distinct from the universe itself? Are the energy/particles that exist and make up your body as well as all the individual bodies in the universe distinct from the universe itself?

[Sparko]

Please quit evading the question. Are the things that exist in the universe distinct from the universe itself? Are the energy/particles that exist and make up your body as well as all the individual bodies in the universe distinct from the universe itself?

since we are the same entity, you should know exactly what I think, Jim.

[JimL]

since we are the same entity, you should know exactly what I think, Jim.

Apparently you have been so far incapable of comprehending, so let me try once again to make clear my argument and then possibly you will be so kind as to give an honest response to it. My argument is that we and all individual things are distinct forms, composed of particles which are themselves distinct forms, but all of which are ultimately derived of and are inseparable from the underlying universal energy which itself is neither created nor destroyed. Energy itself is eternal, ergo necessarily existent, the material forms that it gives rise to are themselves temporal, they change, they come into and go out of existence in time, but the energy, the substance out of which they are derived, remains constant. Being that we are merely the changing forms of that underlying substance, the possible existences within the necessary existence, then though we are distinct in form, those forms are in reality united to the whole and inseparable from it. What is your argument against this?

[seer]

Apparently you have been so far incapable of comprehending, so let me try once again to make clear my argument and then possibly you will be so kind as to give an honest response to it. My argument is that we and all individual things are distinct forms, composed of particles which are themselves distinct forms, but all of which are ultimately derived of and are inseparable from the underlying universal energy which itself is neither created nor destroyed. Energy itself is eternal, ergo necessarily existent, the material forms that it gives rise to are themselves temporal, they change, they come into and go out of existence in time, but the energy, the substance out of which they are derived, remains constant. Being that we are merely the changing forms of that underlying substance, the possible existences within the necessary existence, then though we are distinct in form, those forms are in reality united to the whole and inseparable from it. What is your argument against this?

A couple of points, though I'm a bit late to this discussion. First, we don't know that energy can not be destroyed. It doesn't seem like it can according to our limited understanding at present. But to say that energy is eternal is an assumption. Second, you agree that even if we share universal substance we are still distinct. Especially in mind and personality, so what is the big deal?

[JHardin]

JimL, I think I know what you're saying. If God is the creator of the universe, the fundamental axioms of the universe (time, space, and energy) would also have to be created. Although you focused on the conservation of energy as a proof to your assertion, I think the other two axioms would serve better to prove your assertion. If God created time and space, then before creation, time and space would not have existed at all. So, the all pervasive God of eternity would have had to create a "place" within Himself first, then create "time" within His own timeframe. Energy of course is the final ingredient to make space and time relevant.... but the point is, that God created our universe and everything in it within Himself.

I understand the opposition claiming your assertion is Pantheism, but Pantheism claims that the sum of all things equals God. What I am asserting, and it seems to be what you're asserting, is not that the sum of all things equals God, but that all things consist of God, exist within God, and God pervades all things... but God is also much more than the sum of all things in our existence (our existence defined as things contained withing time and space.). Our existence here could then be likened to a mole (for lack of a better analogy) on God's arm. It's part of God, God is still omni-present, but God is also so much more than just the sum of that mole.

Sorry for the bad analogy :)

[seer]

JimL, I think I know what you're saying. If God is the creator of the universe, the fundamental axioms of the universe (time, space, and energy) would also have to be created. Although you focused on the conservation of energy as a proof to your assertion, I think the other two axioms would serve better to prove your assertion. If God created time and space, then before creation, time and space would not have existed at all. So, the all pervasive God of eternity would have had to create a "place" within Himself first, then create "time" within His own timeframe. Energy of course is the final ingredient to make space and time relevant.... but the point is, that God created our universe and everything in it within Himself.

I understand the opposition claiming your assertion is Pantheism, but Pantheism claims that the sum of all things equals God. What I am asserting, and it seems to be what you're asserting, is not that the sum of all things equals God, but that all things consist of God, exist within God, and God pervades all things... but God is also much more than the sum of all things in our existence (our existence defined as things contained withing time and space.). Our existence here could then be likened to a mole (for lack of a better analogy) on God's arm. It's part of God, God is still omni-present, but God is also so much more than just the sum of that mole.

Sorry for the bad analogy :)

This view would be called Panentheism, which even as a Christian, I do not dismiss out of hand. It has some merit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism

[JimL]

A couple of points, though I'm a bit late to this discussion. First, we don't know that energy can not be destroyed. It doesn't seem like it can according to our limited understanding at present. But to say that energy is eternal is an assumption.

Possibly, I am no expert, but I think that it is a good and logical assumption. If you can't get something from nothing, then it logically follows that neither can you get nothing from something.

Second, you agree that even if we share universal substance we are still distinct. Especially in mind and personality, so what is the big deal?

I agree that we are distinct from one another in form, but that we are only the changing and temporal forms of the same underlying and eternal substance. In other words we are not distinct from the eternal and necessary existent itself, which means that we are not created but exist necessarily with reference to the eternal.

[JimL]

JimL, I think I know what you're saying. If God is the creator of the universe, the fundamental axioms of the universe (time, space, and energy) would also have to be created. Although you focused on the conservation of energy as a proof to your assertion, I think the other two axioms would serve better to prove your assertion. If God created time and space, then before creation, time and space would not have existed at all. So, the all pervasive God of eternity would have had to create a "place" within Himself first, then create "time" within His own timeframe. Energy of course is the final ingredient to make space and time relevant.... but the point is, that God created our universe and everything in it within Himself.

I understand the opposition claiming your assertion is Pantheism, but Pantheism claims that the sum of all things equals God. What I am asserting, and it seems to be what you're asserting, is not that the sum of all things equals God, but that all things consist of God, exist within God, and God pervades all things... but God is also much more than the sum of all things in our existence (our existence defined as things contained withing time and space.). Our existence here could then be likened to a mole (for lack of a better analogy) on God's arm. It's part of God, God is still omni-present, but God is also so much more than just the sum of that mole.

Sorry for the bad analogy :)

This is close to my thinking except I would not go so far as to claim that the necessary existent, the eternal substance of which temporal things are a part is a distinct creator or "God," for such a term is extraneous as opposed to the term "The Universe," it is a distinction without a difference, as neither, in this conception of existence, would be defined as "distinct from" or "creator of" its parts, in the strictest sense of the words.

[Sparko]

This is close to my thinking except I would not go so far as to claim that the necessary existent, the eternal substance of which temporal things are a part is a distinct creator or "God," for such a term is extraneous as opposed to the term "The Universe," it is a distinction without a difference, as neither, in this conception of existence, would be defined as "distinct from" or "creator of" its parts, in the strictest sense of the words.

There is a big difference, Jim. The universe is not an intelligent being. God is. Also God existed without the universe because he created it. God is not dependent on the Universe, but the universe is dependent on God.

[JimL]

There is a big difference, Jim. The universe is not an intelligent being.

I never claimed the universe to be an intelligent being.

God is.

How would you know?

Also God existed without the universe because he created it.

How would you know?

God is not dependent on the Universe, but the universe is dependent on God.

How would you know? This is not a refutation of my argument Sparko, it is just an assertion of your beliefs.

[seer]

I agree that we are distinct from one another in form, but that we are only the changing and temporal forms of the same underlying and eternal substance. In other words we are not distinct from the eternal and necessary existent itself, which means that we are not created but exist necessarily with reference to the eternal.

Well yes James, we may be made of the same eternal "stuff" but minds are completely distinct and created. Energy is not self-aware or intelligent. It does not think. So whether this underlying energy is God, or mindless energy there is still a clear distinction when it comes to minds and personality. I am not you, and you are not me, neither of us is God - and never will be, even if we shared some physical qualities.

[Sparko]

I never claimed the universe to be an intelligent being.


How would you know?

How would you know?

He has revealed it to us, and his spirit confirms it for us. Of course you don't accept that, and it would be an entirely new topic on why the bible is reliably the revelation of God to mankind, with such evidence as fulfilled prophesies.

How would you know? This is not a refutation of my argument Sparko, it is just an assertion of your beliefs.

Your "argument" is nothing more than your own assertion, JimL.

[yo lunch]

There is a big difference, Jim. The universe is not an intelligent being. God is. Also God existed without the universe because he created it. God is not dependent on the Universe, but the universe is dependent on God.

So why would the universe be dependent on god just because he created it? If I created an oil painting, it is not dependent on me. If I die, it is still there. Look at the many paintings in museums and on walls everywhere.

Fact is, even if God did create the universe, it does not mean that he is still around. The universe is random and chaotic and it does not seem to have anyone at the helm.