Justhuman wrote:@RickD and Kurieuo
Many think of God in wrong terms, materialistic terms, even calling "God" a spirit and visualising up some ethereal ghostly form or essence that is God. You know Casper the ghost, or spirits you see in movies or the like, such are represented as materialistic beings. Made of some substance, and perhaps we can even see them or capture such on video. Yet, immaterial, means just that -- not material. The one thing God doesn't fundamentally possess is material form.
Rather God is said to be immaterial, and while I don't wish the delve into the logic of why, just accept that as a given within orthodox Christian thought. If we take such literally, then there is no real divine "substance", there is no "size" God is, there is no "distance" God has from us or our created universe (rather God omnipresent and present everywhere in virtue of His immaterial nature).
Regarding creation, the most we can say is that such was a potentiality contingent upon God. God acts to bring about such a potentiality, and such became an actuality. Many philosophically-minded Christians who explore philosophical questions to do with the nature of reality, tend to lean towards and/or embrace Idealism. For example, if you have the time, while these series of YouTube videos are by a Christian I'm sure you'll no doubt find them very interesting: The Quantum God
While I have no problem to accept it "as a givven within orthodox Christian thought", I can't stop wondering how one can accept it as a 'fact', while there is no evidence or proof. Any evidence is at the most circumstantial, and to accept it as a fact is a matter of believing. But that rules out any other possibilities. Science might go the other way.
Have you considered what "Science" exactly is, that is, the ontological reality it presupposes? Science is an exercise which starts with us,
the subject, and works to understand the world that we find ourselves in. Such is quite neutral to both Theism and Atheism.
Yet, many take it up a notch and project an aura of superiority to a Materialist view of reality, the ontology of such is all that has ever existed and all that ever will exist. But, what justification is given for such? But, it is swallowed by many as in fact true, particularly those who haven't thought much about philosophical questions to do with reality, philosophy of science even (the whole of which is indeed built upon certain philosophical foundations). And now, in theology, one isn't even allowed to believe God exists beyond materialistic boundaries. Really?
Such who really turn it up a notch have convinced many not to question using an authoritarian materialistic approach. One isn't allowed to question outside the walls of materialism, to ask what foundations such rests upon. No, the material world is all there is, and all there will be, despite questions that arise from science itself and reasoning to the contrary. We must just accept that the confines of the four walls we find ourselves within are all that exist, and they just exist in/off themselves, nothing more, nothing less. It is frowned upon to even consider whether there is something holding up those four walls, to consider what lays outside those walls, and even whether the nature of those walls might be more than meets the eye. If someone dares to question the reality of such, or merely thinks about what might lay on the outside, wonders how these walls came to be, or points out some observations within that appear to be more than materialism allows, such people deserve nothing less than to be castigated and ridiculed as irrational fools.
Yet, I ask you, what is wrong with asking questions? Must we accept as brute fact that the confines of the world we find ourselves within are all that exist? Isn't asking why they exist, how they exist just as important as understanding the things that exist within such confines? Perhaps even, as some like myself believe, more important?
You see, if you're following what I'm trying to say, the Materialist's worldview is actually no more justified than the non-Materialist's. Rather one philosophy has simply boasted itself superior, convinced a great many people through beating its chest, puffing itself up and declaring itself the winner, that it is indeed the only view of the world anyone can rationally take. But, I question whether it really can be the winner by default, simply because we find ourselves within a physical world (with immaterial oddities like "love", "consciousness", "morality", strangeness at the quantum level to do with observation [measuring] not being completely passive to reality and much more).
So then, you might question the nature of an immaterial world, but to put a pin into the bubble of materialism, I reject that such is the winner by default. And science itself, can actually strangely point us to a reality beyond the four walls of materialism, the bubble Materialists created is starting to burst (if not has already -- many just haven't seen the writing on the wall). Hence, we have more non-materialistic Atheistic philosophers rising like Thomas Nagel (who is one I respect as a rational Atheist) finding themselves castigated and intellectually punished for dissenting from Materialism. Then there are others, who more often find themselves turning to Agnosticism or some sort of unknown Theism/Deism because they can't bring themselves to believe in any "God" found across mainstream religions.
In any case, I'd highly recommend those videos. You mightn't agree with all points, I expect you won't, but they ought to certainly make you think more deeply about the nature of reality.
Justhuman wrote:I still have to view the Youtube videos you suggested Kurieuo (btw what does Kurieuo mean?), haven't found the time for that yet. So I'll (mostly) refrain from commenting further untill I've seen them.
I began some 20 years ago debating online, but was back then also an avid gamer. So desired an alias that represented both worlds best, and thought the meaning of Kurieuo was cool, and was rarely taken online. It means (no vanity attached whatsoever.
):
