God is NOT just Spirit

[Sargon]

It is almost universally believed by the evangelical world that God is a spirit, and that is all. The most used scripture in defense of this position is John 4:24

Jhn 4:24 God is Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.

I am here to challenge all who believe that this scripture teaches that God is only a spirit. I will not deny that God is spirit, because I believe he is(as well as flesh, like us). After settling the matter of this particular verse we may or may not move to other ones. But I reject the notion that the passage above denies God a physical body.

It is clear that the purpose of this statement, when read in context, was not to make a deep theological declaration about the nature of God, but rather about how he should be worshipped. Let us examine another similar statement made by John:

1Jo 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

John uses the exact same construction in this sentence to teach that God is love. Does this mean that God is not also patience? or power? or light? Well we know that God is light:

1Jo 1:5 ¶ This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
1Jo 1:5 ¶ This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
1Jo 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
1Jo 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Are we to interpret this passage to mean that God is literally nothing but light? Of course not. We see that John has a bit of a habit of describing God in this way. He declares that God is "x", then goes on to use that quality to describe how we should be.

It is unmistakably clear that John is teaching in this passage about how we are to worship God. To a concerned samaritan Christ teaches that it does not matter where God is worshipped, as long as it is done in spirit and in truth. That is the message, nothing else.

What if the passage read the exact opposite?

"God is not spirit, and they that worship him must not worship him in spirit and truth."

Now it becomes clear what is meant in this passage. It is solely teaching the way in which we are to worhip God in spirit and in truth.

What does that mean? Let's see what John thinks:

"For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace. Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness." (The Holy Bible, Romans 8:5-10)

"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

To be born of the spirit, or to be spiritual, is usually used to described a state of holiness, righteousness, and perfection. When understood properly, we can then substitute these definitions into our verse:

"God is holy, righteous, and perfect, and those who worship him must do so in holiness, righteousness, and perfection."

This is the meaning of the verse.


What say ye?

Sargon

[Turgonian]

That you've only proved that God is Spirit.

[Sargon]

I have proven that God is spirit in the exact sense that John meant it, not in the sense that platonic christianity wants it to be.

[Turgonian]

Have you already proven that God has a body? (Or wings...?)

[Silvertusk]

Forgive me for saying this - but isn't this all moot anyway - God is Spirit - and needs to be immaterial to create the universe (see the William Craig videos at http://www.leestrobel.com) but he is also flesh and blood in Jesus?

[Turgonian]

Correct. Jesus had a divine and a human nature.

[Sargon]

Have you already proven that God has a body? (Or wings...?)

In the course of this thread I have not intended to. I have only shown that the number one scripture used by most to show that God does not have a body, does not in fact teach that.

Forgive me for saying this - but isn't this all moot anyway - God is Spirit - and needs to be immaterial to create the universe (see the William Craig videos at http://www.leestrobel.com) but he is also flesh and blood in Jesus?

It is a preconceived notion that spirit is immaterial. No logical argument can be made to prove that God has to be immaterial in order to create material things.

Demonstrating that Christ is God, that God is spirit, and has a body of flesh and bones only confirms that the passage in question cannot be teaching that God does not have a body.

Sargon

[Turgonian]

No. And it doesn't teach that God lays eggs, either. Does God lay eggs?

'Spirit' is immaterial; that's part of its definition. It comes from spiritus, which originally meant 'breath'. Breath and wind definitely do things (like moving), but they're not material. The same goes for spirit. It's not a preconceived notion, it's simply the semantic meaning of the word.

'Christ is God' -- yes.
'God is spirit' -- yes. But that doesn't mean Christ was spirit. Christ had a human nature and a divine nature. He became as one of us, except in sin. This included taking a human body.

Philosophy shows that space, time and matter are bound together. If God is material, He is limited to space and time. If He is, who created the space and time He lives in?

[FFC]

No. And it doesn't teach that God lays eggs, either. Does God lay eggs?

Luk 13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen [doth gather] her brood under [her] wings, and ye would not!

Hmmm.

[Turgonian]

Oh dear, Rembrandt's painting is trying to be smart.

[Sargon]

The point is that the only verse used to show that God is spirit and does not have a material body, does not teach it.

No. And it doesn't teach that God lays eggs, either.

Then you agree with me. Your only defense is to resort to philosophy.

'Spirit' is immaterial; that's part of its definition. It comes from spiritus, which originally meant 'breath'. Breath and wind definitely do things (like moving), but they're not material. The same goes for spirit. It's not a preconceived notion, it's simply the semantic meaning of the word.

The definition of spirit according to the greeks is that it is immaterial. The word translated spirit was "pneuma" in the greek NT. You correctly said it means "breath" and "wind". However you incorrectly assert that breath and wind are immaterial things. Breath is made of gases, wind is too. Gases are not solid, but they are not immaterial. Were they immaterial we as material beings probably would not be able to feel them on our skin.

Philosophy shows that space, time and matter are bound together. If God is material, He is limited to space and time. If He is, who created the space and time He lives in?

Thats the exact problem. Philosophy. There is no proof for any of it.
Besides that, let us suppose that God is limited to space and time. How does that limit him? It doesnt in any way. Christ was very material and yet he declared himself to possess all power in heaven and earth. There is no philosophy in that. Just pure truth. There is no biblical support for the "philosophy" that God created space and time. Were you to show that God created all things, and were you to define it as including space and time, you would have to include God himself in that definition. Was God created? Not any more that space and time were. Must God be the only eternal thing? It is not taught in scripture. Can God manipulate time? Sure.

Sargon

[Turgonian]

Come now. Philosophy offers proof, because it's logical. God is a God of logic.
Our logic may be off base, of course.

So you think God is made of gas?

Christ had a human and a divine nature. His divine nature was eternal, omniscient, spiritual. Of course He could possess all authority everywhere.

There is no biblical support for the "philosophy" that God created space and time.

There's no biblical support for the law of gravity either.
Space, time and matter are bound up. If you have matter without time and space, where/when do you put it?

Were you to show that God created all things, and were you to define it as including space and time, you would have to include God himself in that definition.

Circular reasoning, since it only applies if God is material.
Do you think space and time is eternal? Why do you think so, and what do you do with the law of entropy? And if God operates within time, how can He 'declare the end from the beginning' and make plans in eternity?

[Sargon]

Our logic may be off base, of course.

Excellent point.

So you think God is made of gas?

Of course I dont. You said that the word translated as spirit also means breath and wind, and described them as immaterial things. I pointed out that breath and wind are not immaterial, and neither is God.

Christ had a human and a divine nature. His divine nature was eternal, omniscient, spiritual. Of course He could possess all authority everywhere.

His nature was spiritual, yet he had a material body of flesh and bones. How exactly is it that you are defining spiritual in this sentence?

Space, time and matter are bound up. If you have matter without time and space, where/when do you put it?

Following this logic, assuming that it is correct, I would then declare that God is matter. He is in time, and in space. The bible does not teach the contrary. Time and space are just as eternal as anything else.

Sargon wrote:
Were you to show that God created all things, and were you to define it as including space and time, you would have to include God himself in that definition.

Circular reasoning, since it only applies if God is material.
quote]
Nay. Let me try again. Verses that teach that God created everything are often interpreted to mean "everything except God", including time and space. Unfortunately this is not what the verses say. They usually say something like "everything in heaven and earth", or simply "all things". Those who wish to interpret as "all things except God" have interpreted it literally, but only half-way. They have literally excepted that God created every single thing that exists, but do not literally include God in that definition as they should were they to be consistent.
I propose that these verse not be interpreted in such a manner. Instead, let us consider the meaning of "created", ie make, build. It implies taking pre-existent materials and creating something from them. Much like we build buildings, or corporations. We use pre-existent resources and build from their. It was in this way that God created "all things", not the unbiblical concept of ex nihilo.
Sargon wrote:
Were you to show that God created all things, and were you to define it as including space and time, you would have to include God himself in that definition.

Do you think space and time is eternal? Why do you think so, and what do you do with the law of entropy? And if God operates within time, how can He 'declare the end from the beginning' and make plans in eternity?

Yes. I think space and time are eternal. Before expounding on this meaning, we must reach a consensus on the definition of these two words. What is space? What is time?
For me time is easier to understand. Time is merely a yardstick for measuring intervals between events. Let us suppose that God created time. Let us call the moment in which God created time X. What was there at X-1? We would need a way to describe it, something like

before

time. Wouldn't the word before be indicative of time itself? We cant have a "before" unless there is time to seperate the two events.
Hence, time is eternal.
How can God declare the beginning from the end? Well if time is eternal and God is eternal then god has been around for all of time, which subsequently is eternity. How can God then declare the beginning of eternity from the end of eternity? Well there is no beginning or end of eternity. Christ declares himself to be the alpha and omega, the beginning and end, yet Christ is also eternal. I have no problem with this. It is merely a way to describe to weak mortal minds the concept that God is eternal.
Explain to me your point about the law of entropy and I will comment. From what I remember the law of entropy says something about universal disorder increasing whenever there is a spontaneous reaction. How does this apply?

Well we have gotten way off the original subject. I would like to know if there is any biblical evidence you know of suggesting that God is merely spirit, with no element of flesh.

Sargon

[Turgonian]

Our logic may be off base, of course.

Excellent point.

Or it may not.

So you think God is made of gas?

Of course I dont. You said that the word translated as spirit also means breath and wind, and described them as immaterial things. I pointed out that breath and wind are not immaterial, and neither is God.

Breath & wind were probably seen as immaterial in the ancient world -- as invisible, immaterial forces.

Christ had a human and a divine nature. His divine nature was eternal, omniscient, spiritual. Of course He could possess all authority everywhere.

His nature was spiritual, yet he had a material body of flesh and bones. How exactly is it that you are defining spiritual in this sentence?

Immaterial.

Space, time and matter are bound up. If you have matter without time and space, where/when do you put it?

Following this logic, assuming that it is correct, I would then declare that God is matter. He is in time, and in space. The bible does not teach the contrary. Time and space are just as eternal as anything else.

Then God is not outside of time, but limited within it. Neither is He the Creator of everything.
You still haven't explained what you're going to do with the law of entropy, which states that everything will automatically increase in randomness over time. I.e. order decreases. If matter would be eternal, everything would have been random and chaotic LONG before today...

Nay. Let me try again. Verses that teach that God created everything are often interpreted to mean "everything except God", including time and space. Unfortunately this is not what the verses say. They usually say something like "everything in heaven and earth", or simply "all things". Those who wish to interpret as "all things except God" have interpreted it literally, but only half-way. They have literally excepted that God created every single thing that exists, but do not literally include God in that definition as they should were they to be consistent.

'God created all things' -- that sentence presupposes there is a God, because He's the one doing the creating. It doesn't presuppose there is time, space and matter. So you're just making that up out of thin air.
Don't you think that the sentence 'God created all things except God' is rather absurd and superfluous?

I propose that these verse not be interpreted in such a manner. Instead, let us consider the meaning of "created", ie make, build. It implies taking pre-existent materials and creating something from them. Much like we build buildings, or corporations. We use pre-existent resources and build from their. It was in this way that God created "all things", not the unbiblical concept of ex nihilo.

So God is not the only one who is self-subsisting. Like Plato's Demiurg, he used things He didn't even make. Like a kid playing with Lego.
The meaning of 'create' which you use is the human one. However, 'create' with reference to God has had the added meaning of ex nihilo for millennia. You can't really compare God's work to that of humans and assume that's any kind of proof.

For me time is easier to understand. Time is merely a yardstick for measuring intervals between events. Let us suppose that God created time. Let us call the moment in which God created time X. What was there at X-1? We would need a way to describe it, something like "before"-time. Wouldn't the word before be indicative of time itself? We cant have a "before" unless there is time to seperate the two events.
Hence, time is eternal.

Your logic is wrong. Time starts at X - OK. What was there at X - 1? It's senseless, because that moment doesn't exist, just like I can't have -1 of any object in my hand. You can't go before 0.
So, what was before (and after, and above...the prepositions don't really work) time? Eternity. An actual infinite (without progression) rather than a potential infinite (without end).

BTW, you say that the concept of creatio ex nihilo is unbiblical, but your concept isn't in the Bible either.

Well we have gotten way off the original subject. I would like to know if there is any biblical evidence you know of suggesting that God is merely spirit, with no element of flesh.

The burden of proof is on the one who alleges... What texts do you base your belief on that God is flesh?

[Sargon]

Sargon wrote:
Turgonian wrote:
Christ had a human and a divine nature. His divine nature was eternal, omniscient, spiritual. Of course He could possess all authority everywhere.

His nature was spiritual, yet he had a material body of flesh and bones. How exactly is it that you are defining spiritual in this sentence?

Immaterial.

So his body of flesh and bones was immaterial, despite that fact that proved he was just as material as any man?

You still haven't explained what you're going to do with the law of entropy, which states that everything will automatically increase in randomness over time. I.e. order decreases. If matter would be eternal, everything would have been random and chaotic LONG before today...

Unfortunately you have erred. The Law of entropy states that molecular disorder will always increase in

a spontaneous reaction

. Every reaction is not a spontaneous one.

'God created all things' -- that sentence presupposes there is a God, because He's the one doing the creating. It doesn't presuppose there is time, space and matter. So you're just making that up out of thin air.
Don't you think that the sentence 'God created all things except God' is rather absurd and superfluous?

It presupposes that time, space and matter exist, especially if God is made of matter, dwells within time, and dwells within space.
The sentence "God created all things except God" does sound absurd, but the sentence "God created all things under heaven and earth" does not. It is clear he is referring to the creation of the earth and skies, not to time, matter, and space. Just as we can create "all things" within a laboratory, but that doesnt mean we created the space and time to do it in. Remeber, time is merely a yardstick for measuring intervals between events in eternity.

So God is not the only one who is self-subsisting.

Incorrect. Time and matter and space are not whos, but are whats. Those materials are self-subsisting. They exist as naturally as God himself.

The meaning of 'create' which you use is the human one. However, 'create' with reference to God has had the added meaning of ex nihilo for millennia. You can't really compare God's work to that of humans and assume that's any kind of proof.

The meaning for create that I use is the one used in God's word. The added meaning of ex nihilo is just that, an added meaning. It is not original, and not true.
You certainly can compare God's work to human work. Of course, it can't be on the same scale, but it is of the same nature. We are his children, created in his image. He created us to be like him, not to be him, but to be like him. Image and likeness.

Your logic is wrong. Time starts at X - OK. What was there at X - 1? It's senseless, because that moment doesn't exist, just like I can't have -1 of any object in my hand. You can't go before 0.
So, what was before (and after, and above...the prepositions don't really work) time? Eternity. An actual infinite (without progression) rather than a potential infinite (without end).

I totally agree. It is completely senseless to fathom that there was ever an X-1. In fact, to imagine that there was an X(moment of the creation of time) at all is completely senseless. Time is only a measurement of events in eternity, and certainly events have been happening throughout all eternity, unless you believe God didn't exist until "time" came into being.

BTW, you say that the concept of creatio ex nihilo is unbiblical, but your concept isn't in the Bible either.

My concept stems from a logical conclusion based on biblical teachings. It is based on teachings that God is a person, as real and tangible as you and I. It is based on the gospel of Jesus Christ, that says that God is eternal and has always existed, and as such has always been active. Can he be considered God if he were the God of nothing? It is selfish to assume that we are only planet full of creations that God has ever created.

Sargon