Evidence for God from Science

PaulSacramento wrote:There are things that are implicit and those that are explicit.
In writing to the people of their time, the biblical writers wrote in a way that THOSE PEOPLE would understand.
The imagery of God on a throne for example, portrays God as King of All but does got have to have a body or sit on a throne?
Of course not, why would God limit Himself?
God can show Himself to whom He chooses in any way He chooses. that doesn't mean that He is "stuck" that way.
That is limiting God.
Scripture is clear that God is Spirit and that Spirit is immaterial, but scripture is also clear that God can appear in a human form and why not? He is, after all, God and he can do anything He chooses to.

Giving Him a form does not mean He is limited. i agree He can show Himself to anyone He chooses, in any way He chooses. but that does not mean He is immaterial, and there are no passages that say He is immaterial. if there are, please quote them. again, He can feel emotion, such as anger, jealousy, compassion sadness, etc. He can see, which means He has eyes, He knows everything, which means He has a brain. an immaterial form does not have those things.

RickD wrote:

jenna wrote:

RickD wrote:

jenna wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Did the Lord not cover Moses with His hand? What kind of hand was it...

according to you it was just symbolism. but that was not what you asked me. But yes, it was a literal hand. so that moses would not see His (literal) face and die

Do you mean to tell me that a Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter, died for my sins on a cross?

Then this Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter rose on the third day? And a Roman spear punctured this Relatively hard, naturally formed mineral or petrified matter?

oh for heaven's sake. are we going to go through this again? God is not just some amorphous blob with no form or shape. He has a heart and a brain and eyes to see. Does an immaterial form have these things? How can an immaterial form feel anger, compassion, love and jealousy?

And Jesus Christ is a literal rock. Show me from scripture where it says that Jesus is not a literal rock.

Jenna,

You need to rethink this. Seriously.

please re-read and answer the questions above? and please try not to get me off-track with another topic?

This is utterly fascinating. I had no idea there exists a belief that even God the Father has form.

Post edit question for Jenna: If God the Father has form (a body, though still immaterial - I really don't see how but I'll let that pass for now) how do you presume he can at the same time have an attribute such as omni-presence? Surely if he has a body then he must be confined to a specific place and time, right?

Byblos wrote:This is utterly fascinating. I had no idea there exists a belief that even God the Father has form.

Post edit question for Jenna: If God the Father has form (a body, though still immaterial - I really don't see how but I'll let that pass for now) how do you presume he can at the same time have an attribute such as omni-presence? Surely if he has a body then he must be confined to a specific place and time, right?

I can see how one might think that. But since God gives us the HS, He can and does use that Holy spirit to know what His people are doing and why. Even an immaterial body or form must be confined to a specific place and time, given the logic that you and others have presented. Or do you think God just has some shapeless form floating about through space?

jenna wrote:God is spirit, yes, but just because something is spirit does not mean it cannot have a shape or form or body. a body does not have to be flesh, it can be spirit and still be a body. I do not remember what words Christ gave that said spirits dont have hands or feet, please where did He say that?

I take it you missed my post here. And you are wrong about a spirit being a body. A spirit cannot be a body. Bodies are material. Spirits are not material. So a spirit that is a body would an immaterial material thing. Look at the logic of Jesus' words (discussed in that post).

Jac3510 wrote:

jenna wrote:ok. while i agree that God is the creator of this world, and is not contingent on us for His existance, i have to disagree that He is immaterial. He has features just like we do. He has feet, hands, a backside, and a face. Although no human has ever seen Him, that is merely because no one can look upon His face and live. All the above things are described in the bible as features that God has. so one cannot say He is immaterial, simply because no one can look at Him. Moses was in His presence, and the mere closeness of proximity to God caused Moses's hair to turn white, and his face to shine. can you imagine the reaction if Moses had actually seen the full image?

Rick is right. Those are anthropomorphisms. I don't think we can say that God actually has hands and face and a back and other such things. I'll give you a reason from Scripture and another reason from reason itself based squarely on Scripture:

First, 1 John 4:24 says directly, "God is Spirit." It does not say that God has a Spirit, but rather that He is Spirit. but then Jesus says, "See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:39). Thus, by Jesus' authority, we must say that God does not have a body. That is, He is immaterial.

Second, Gen 1 tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. John 1 tells us that everything came into being by Jesus, that nothing came into being apart from Him. Everywhere in Scripture, the consistent position is that everything that exists, exists because God willed it. Only He is eternal. But if He is eternal, then He cannot have a body. He cannot be material. For if God has a body and is material, then

a) He could not have created space. Matter is located in space, so without space, there can be no matter. But if God is material, then space has always existed to accomodate God's physical location; and
b) He could not have created time. Material beings are necessarily located in time, so that without time, there is no matter. Buf if God is material, then time has always existed to accomodate God's temporal location

There are other arguments we could make (e.g., if God has a body, it would turn out that He is contingent on us after all), but this is enough to show that you cannot say God actually has a body without contradicting Scripture. So I think the rest of my argument follows.

major logic problems with this. Firstly, God is spirit, yes. secondly, one can have a body (or form) without it having to be a flesh and blood body. (just ask Casper ) i have never ONCE stated that God's form was flesh and blood. But i have stated that He has a form, one that we are made in the likeness and image of. I find it rather odd that when God makes statements that are to be taken literally, man takes them as analogy, but the metaphoric statements are taken literally.

Been following this, can I add my thoughts?

We are made in His image, not His physical image but spiritual. God is Existence.
Christ was/is God. God personified if you like, an example of Godliness for us to follow, a way to live as God. A way to grasp God, existence.

Personally I think I knew the HS before I knew God, certainly before Christ. I think it was the HS that drew me to God, to Christ.
I don't fully understand the trinity but I feel it, I know it somehow.

Jenna, if you've not read Jacs book on Divine Simplicity, please, please do. I found so much truth and sense in it. I spent pretty much the whole time going of course!

I don't see the HS as Gods way of knowing what we are up to, more as something real we can relate to, feel,know. We don't have Christ in physical form, or God, so we have the HS.

I haven't explained that very well, tis hard to put into words, which is why Jacs book is so good.

Just a thought here, occured to me as I was typing... energy and matter are interchangeable I believe, so is it possible that God did take form, that it was a literal hand?

I always used to think God was this "thing" that as mere mortal humans could never comprehend, that He was indeed pure energy, that Christ was that energy in matter, God as something we could recognise, the HS the essence if you like.

Not sure if that helps, or indeed even makes sense...

jenna wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:There are things that are implicit and those that are explicit.
In writing to the people of their time, the biblical writers wrote in a way that THOSE PEOPLE would understand.
The imagery of God on a throne for example, portrays God as King of All but does got have to have a body or sit on a throne?
Of course not, why would God limit Himself?
God can show Himself to whom He chooses in any way He chooses. that doesn't mean that He is "stuck" that way.
That is limiting God.
Scripture is clear that God is Spirit and that Spirit is immaterial, but scripture is also clear that God can appear in a human form and why not? He is, after all, God and he can do anything He chooses to.

Giving Him a form does not mean He is limited. i agree He can show Himself to anyone He chooses, in any way He chooses. but that does not mean He is immaterial, and there are no passages that say He is immaterial. if there are, please quote them. again, He can feel emotion, such as anger, jealousy, compassion sadness, etc. He can see, which means He has eyes, He knows everything, which means He has a brain. an immaterial form does not have those things.

What do you make of Deut 4:12 which reads: "Then the Lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the sound of words but saw no form; there was only a voice." How can there be only a voice? You underestimate the nature of God if you really think material form is needed for such.

John 4:24 "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (it's a big difference to say "God is spirit," rather than has a spirit like us)

Luke 24:39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (yet, we both understand Jesus is God incarnate taking on a full human nature, yet prior to such in the beginning, the Lord had an eternal nature that was spirit. Jesus being God is spirit.)

Hebrews 11:3 "By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible." (i.e., God, even Jesus created such cf. John 1:1-3)

Further down in John 1:12-13 we have, "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." (ergo, God isn't blood, nor flesh) God simply manifested himself to us in full human bodily form as per John 1:14, "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

While we're made in God's image, God doesn't possess the image of man. To reason vice-versa is to commit an error in logic that A implies B, therefore B implies A. Socrates might be a man, but this doesn't mean a man is Socrates. God is love, but love is not God. We might possess God's image, but that doesn't mean God possesses our image.

In light of this, consider Isaiah 42:8 which reads, "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to anyone else..." And, completely damning to your view of God having human form, Deuteronomy 4:15-18 which uses God's lack of form as reason to not worship anything with form:

• "15You saw no form of any kind the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, 16so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, 17or like any animal on earth or any bird that flies in the air, 18or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below. 19And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars—all the heavenly array—do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the Lord your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven."

Again, we're made in God's image, but that doesn't mean God possesses our physical human form or image of such.

In response to Sadducees question of a woman who has been married multiple times, whose wife she would be in heaven, Jesus answered, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." (Matt 22:29-30)

Similarly I very strongly see that you are mistaken here, not understanding the power of God if you think He needs a material body to experience what is foundationally spiritual such as emotion, love and the like. Rather, God is love, God is righteousness, God is goodness, and these are spiritual qualities, fruits of the spirit even. Ultimately because God is spirit.

Kurieuo wrote:

jenna wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:There are things that are implicit and those that are explicit.
In writing to the people of their time, the biblical writers wrote in a way that THOSE PEOPLE would understand.
The imagery of God on a throne for example, portrays God as King of All but does got have to have a body or sit on a throne?
Of course not, why would God limit Himself?
God can show Himself to whom He chooses in any way He chooses. that doesn't mean that He is "stuck" that way.
That is limiting God.
Scripture is clear that God is Spirit and that Spirit is immaterial, but scripture is also clear that God can appear in a human form and why not? He is, after all, God and he can do anything He chooses to.

Giving Him a form does not mean He is limited. i agree He can show Himself to anyone He chooses, in any way He chooses. but that does not mean He is immaterial, and there are no passages that say He is immaterial. if there are, please quote them. again, He can feel emotion, such as anger, jealousy, compassion sadness, etc. He can see, which means He has eyes, He knows everything, which means He has a brain. an immaterial form does not have those things.

What do you make of Deut 4:12 which reads: "Then the Lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the sound of words but saw no form; there was only a voice." How can there be only a voice? You underestimate the nature of God if you really think material form is needed for such.

no, i think God chose not to show His form at that time.

Kurieuo wrote:John 4:24 "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (it's a big difference to say "God is spirit," rather than has a spirit like us)

what about the HS?

Kurieuo wrote:Luke 24:39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (yet, we both understand Jesus is God incarnate taking on a full human nature, yet prior to such in the beginning, the Lord had an eternal nature that was spirit. Jesus being God is spirit.)

I did not say God was flesh and blood, I said He has a form

Kurieuo wrote:Hebrews 11:3 "By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible." (i.e., God, even Jesus created such cf. John 1:1-3)

Further down in John 1:12-13 we have, "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." (ergo, God isn't blood, nor flesh) God simply manifested himself to us in full human bodily form as per John 1:14, "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

While we're made in God's image, God doesn't possess the image of man. To reason vice-versa is to commit an error in logic that A implies B, therefore B implies A. Socrates might be a man, but this doesn't mean a man is Socrates. God is love, but love is not God. We might possess God's image, but that doesn't mean God possesses our image.

In light of this, consider Isaiah 42:8 which reads, "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to anyone else..." And, completely damning to your view of God having human form, Deuteronomy 4:15-18 which uses God's lack of form as reason to not worship anything with form:

• "15You saw no form of any kind the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, 16so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, 17or like any animal on earth or any bird that flies in the air, 18or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below. 19And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars—all the heavenly array—do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the Lord your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven."

Again, we're made in God's image, but that doesn't mean God possesses our physical human form or image of such.

In response to Sadducees question of a woman who has been married multiple times, whose wife she would be in heaven, Jesus answered, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." (Matt 22:29-30)

Similarly I very strongly see that you are mistaken here, not understanding the power of God if you think He needs a material body to experience what is foundationally spiritual such as emotion, love and the like. Rather, God is love, God is righteousness, God is goodness, and these are spiritual qualities, fruits of the spirit even. Ultimately because God is spirit.

God is spirit, yes, I have never once, at any place, passage or time stated otherwise, nor have I ever once stated that God was flesh and blood. The only statement I have made here is that God has a form, a shape, and we as humans are made in the likeness of that shape.

But, how did God talk is such requires material form?

Jenna, I'd like to point out that you previously conceded that the image of God isn't primarily to do with shape.

Also, I think you're overlooking God's argument in Deut that he has no form, using the event of Moses as illustrative of such.

jenna wrote: God is spirit, yes, I have never once, at any place, passage or time stated otherwise, nor have I ever once stated that God was flesh and blood. The only statement I have made here is that God has a form, a shape, and we as humans are made in the likeness of that shape.

But form implies shape, and shape implies defining features which means it is limited in space-time and therefore contingent upon it. I seriously implore you to consider the implications of such a position that is rejected by most (if not all) theist and atheist philosophers alike. It makes God utterly incoherent.

Byblos wrote:

jenna wrote: God is spirit, yes, I have never once, at any place, passage or time stated otherwise, nor have I ever once stated that God was flesh and blood. The only statement I have made here is that God has a form, a shape, and we as humans are made in the likeness of that shape.

But form implies shape, and shape implies defining features which means it is limited in space-time and therefore contingent upon it. I seriously implore you to consider the implications of such a position that is rejected by most (if not all) theist and atheist philosophers alike. It makes God utterly incoherent.

actually, no, it doesnt make God incoherent. and yes, having a shape implies features, which i have said before. however, to be incoherent He would need to be a shapeless, formless blob, which for some reason, is the impression i am getting that you think He is?

Kurieuo wrote:But, how did God talk is such requires material form?

Jenna, I'd like to point out that you previously conceded that the image of God isn't primarily to do with shape.

Also, I think you're overlooking God's argument in Deut that he has no form, using the event of Moses as illustrative of such.

this is the line of thinking that gets me, lol. first i am told that God can take any shape or form He pleases. Then i am told that I am underestimating God. then i am asked how did God speak without material form? it seems YOU are the one asserting God has no material form. (correct me if i am wrong) so if He has no form, how does/did He speak? who is the one underestimating God?

jenna wrote:

Byblos wrote:

jenna wrote: God is spirit, yes, I have never once, at any place, passage or time stated otherwise, nor have I ever once stated that God was flesh and blood. The only statement I have made here is that God has a form, a shape, and we as humans are made in the likeness of that shape.

But form implies shape, and shape implies defining features which means it is limited in space-time and therefore contingent upon it. I seriously implore you to consider the implications of such a position that is rejected by most (if not all) theist and atheist philosophers alike. It makes God utterly incoherent.

actually, no, it doesnt make God incoherent. and yes, having a shape implies features, which i have said before. however, to be incoherent He would need to be a shapeless, formless blob, which for some reason, is the impression i am getting that you think He is?

Shapeless, yes. Formless, yes. A blob, no, for a blob implies shape and form.

Jenna, please look into William Lane Craig's kalam cosmological argument (which, ordinarily I wouldn't recommend but I think is most appropriate in this case). The necessary conclusion we draw from that logical argument is that God is timeless, spaceless, immaterial, immensly powerful unembodied mind. That is the God of the Bible that spoke reality into existence.

Byblos wrote:

jenna wrote:

Byblos wrote:

jenna wrote: God is spirit, yes, I have never once, at any place, passage or time stated otherwise, nor have I ever once stated that God was flesh and blood. The only statement I have made here is that God has a form, a shape, and we as humans are made in the likeness of that shape.

But form implies shape, and shape implies defining features which means it is limited in space-time and therefore contingent upon it. I seriously implore you to consider the implications of such a position that is rejected by most (if not all) theist and atheist philosophers alike. It makes God utterly incoherent.

actually, no, it doesnt make God incoherent. and yes, having a shape implies features, which i have said before. however, to be incoherent He would need to be a shapeless, formless blob, which for some reason, is the impression i am getting that you think He is?

Shapeless, yes. Formless, yes. A blob, no, for a blob implies shape and form.

Jenna, please look into William Lane Craig's kalam cosmological argument (which, ordinarily I wouldn't recommend but I think is most appropriate in this case). The necessary conclusion we draw from that logical argument is that God is timeless, spaceless, immaterial, immensly powerful unembodied mind. That is the God of the Bible that spoke reality into existence.

ok, then, so then what image are we created after? please note that an image being something you can see. if God is nothing more than an immensely powerful unembodied mind, then why did He choose the forms we are in now to make us IN HIS IMAGE? would He not choose an unembodied mind?