Reply to you and Audie.....Given that this discussion has turned to a philosophical argument around the nature of God, I retract my statement about the nature of Gods being so that the substance of my post can stand without it. Philosophical arguments are endlessly a waste of time. Please reply to the revamp.PaulSacramento wrote:That you don't understand what I am saying does NOT mean I am not making any sense.
I suggest you read what I am saying, watch the tone and be more open to the fact that someone of us have actual training in Theology and Philosophy and IF we are making statements that you don't understand, just say so and ask for clarification rather than being rude and implying that a person is just posting "for the sake of it".
Understood?
No one is suggesting that God's FORM can't change.
What is being stated is that God CAN'T change.
If you don't comprehend that VERY BASIC point and can't grasp the distinction, then what are we debating here at all? and why?
To say that God is energy is to male a statement on His NATURE and to say that His nature is energy is to LIMIT God to being JUST ENERGY.
Do you not understand that the vary fact that you just LIMITED God means that your view of God means that He is NOT God?
In relation to the thread topic, there are proven and observed physics that attest that a huge amount of energy/light, which God is able to manipulate, and therefore, can produce matter in an instant. This has been achieved in the matter accelerator. If it is theoretically possible to teleport matter, and matter can be created by a huge source of energy/light, then I suggest it is theoretically possible for a superior being to use matter to make, not only the universe, but also plants and animals as life consists of arranged particles/elements.
To add to my stance on Gods ability to use energy to create matter in an instant, I argue that all current theoretical hypothesis in relation to abiogenes are not plausible given that DNA, RNA and the current one, proteins first, require a host. It appears to be plausible that God created instantly. We have the physics and the theoretical framework already. The Host must come first, not an imagined 'primitive' cell. There is nothing primitive about even single celled life, a complex factory of reproduction. IOW life arising without the hand of God, or life arising by natural processes that does not require a designer appears to be impossible.
For theists, we also have testimony that Jesus was able to create/multiply bread and fish as well as bring the dead to life. So even in an earthy form, Jesus was able to call on an amazing knowledge of physics to create in an instant.
Indeed the substance of my post has not been addressed. I suggest instant creation, particularly of life, is more plausible than theories around abiogeneis and TOE.