Within a reasonable degree of probability, we know where electrons are. We certainly know where atoms are. We even think we know where black holes are.
So where is God?
Is there any other putative entity in the universe that people believe exists but for which no location in the spacetime continuum is even suggested?
Even with respect to concepts, ideas, beliefs, etc., we believe (or at least most of us believe) that they exist in the neural connections within specific areas of human brains even if, at this particular moment in history, we cannot pin down the precise location more accurately than that.
Normally, when we say ‘entity x’ exists, we mean, at the least, that x exists in a particular location. We don’t mean this when x is God.
What are the reasons that we exempt God from this standard and do those reasons stand up to scrutiny?
Beyond repeating the arguments made in the “Materialism” thread, does anyone have any thoughts about this?
God is omni-present. God is not merely a being; God is being itself. God is both immanent in all things and transcendent beyond all things. It has been said that God’s center is everwhere and His circumferance nowhere. “In him all things live and move and have their being.” God is a is foundational symbol. Entities can be defined in terms of God but not vice versa.
I have no idea what you just described… I can think of no thing nor any collection of things that would qualify as “god”… and therefor “god” is a meaningless term to me…
God’s omnipresence follows from the fact that God is the cause of all existence. As being itself, it is God’s nature to exist. As being itself he causes all finite beings to exist. That is, they are by participating in being itself which is God. God transmission of being to beings is like fire itself which sets things on fire. Being is more intimately and profoundly interior to things than anything else. God exists intimately in everything.
I know because, since we are beings, it is possible to become aware of God’s presence.
Apparently you are unfamiliar with the history of western theism because what I wrote is consistent with it. Or maybe you thing that is gibberish too. It appears that from your statement that you are a concrete thinker. Perhaps you lack the necessary abstract ability or inclination necessary to understand theology. In keeping with the times, you are unlikely to view your perspective as an intellectual limitation, but I hope you won’t be surprised if I do.
“the perfect circle” a “stright line” and all other such abstractions are pure gibbirish to me as well… but I understand their function in mathematics… The same is true of God… yet I am able to understand gods function in theology and personal belief systems…
BUT
When we try to incorperate these abstracts into “objective reality”… we find them to be meaningless… that is after all why we call them “abstracts”.
If all you are saying is that god is an “abstract” notion… then I compleatly agree with you… and you may define “god” as anything you wish within the world of abstracts… but in objective reality… the word “god” does not refer to anything… The same as any other abstract notion… They only exist in the mind/brain…
Leaving the transcedent part of God aside for the moment, I’d like to better understand what you mean when you say that God is “immanent in all things.”
Do you mean to say that God is like (or perhaps, is, in fact) the most fundamental particle in the universe? . . . that he is that of which everything else is composed?
Or do you mean that God is only a part of everything that exists but that he is not everything that exists. IOW, that things exist which are not God?
It’s not possible for God to be a part of everything that exist, maybe some selective things. Or at least the God thats most commonly known. What God are we discussing. Maybe this could be a God that does, but no evil or good exist with him or her.
Maybe were all Gods, or maybe God doesn’t exist. Maybe the bible isn’t even true. Maybe no religions are true. Maybe something other than what everyone’s thought of exist out there just begging to be thought about once. Maybe it’s dark matter, maybe dark matter is a God that has started things that have happened like the big bang.
Maybe we could all ramble on all day and never come to a conclusion. But at least we are exercising our brain right.
I am surprised to learn that a perfect circle and a straight line are gibberish. Aren’t every approximate particular “circleâ€and “line†defined by their respective universal concepts? Every particular thing derives it’s meaning from a universal. How then can universals be “meaninglessâ€?
I actually said that God is symbolic not abstract. But, as God is literally intangible, if you think abstractions are meaningless gibberish, symbolism may not be your cup of meat. God is not an object and therefore does not exist in “objective reality.†God exists in and is synonymous with ultimate reality .
Ever consider that you might be looking at God right now? That all we know may exist within God himself. Certainly, this is only an aspect of God which we can see with our eyes. I believe there are different densities of matter, many of which we can’t see. Mind, for example, is made of a more subtle matter. We know it exists, yet our eyes can’t see it. This is presumably because denser matter can’t see more subtle matter. Yet, nde’s and obe’s, in which people see from a position in the room without the use of their physical eyes, would seem to indicate that subtler matter can see the denser forms.
The possibility of other dimensions is being shown as increasingly believable through String Theory.
As for what existing out of time is: It seems to me that time is nothing more than change. Our view of time as moving in a direction is just an organizing principle necessary so that it doesn’t get jumbled in our head. We put perceptions in number form: 1st, 2nd, 3rd - in spacial terms. This is because, if we didn’t, they would all blend into one, and our current existence, particularly communication, would be impossible. Time is not really directional. Every ‘moment’ is simply a different ‘configuration’ of the universe. The configuration changes, but we don’t move through any ‘time dimension’. Space-time exists only in the mind as an organizing principle. This is my interpretation.
No… rather the reverse… the “universal concept” is defined by a collection of perticular objects… the difference between deductive knowledge… and inductive knowledge…
I was not born fully familar with geomatry… I did not have knowledge of a “perfect circle” apriori…
Because if there were no set of perticulars they referred to… they would be empty sets… devoid of meaning… “perfect circle” is an empty set… simply saying “circle” is not… “stright line” is an empty set… a “line” is not…
“god” is an empty set… the “universe” is not…
symbolic of what?
I’m afried I am not familar with the term “ultimate reality”… please explain to me what “ultimate reality” means…
It’s simple. God is ultimate reality and ultimate reality is God. Got it now?
Seriously though, I’m not sure what those who claim that god is ultimate reality mean, either, MMP. Do they mean that god should be the name that we give to the most fundamental particle that we discover? Do they mean, like pantheists, that god is synonymous with the universe?
I don’t know what they mean and I’m not convinced that they know what they mean, either. It seems to be some sort of ontological distinction which at the end of the day is essentially trivial in an epistemic sense.
By that I mean this: Are there things out there that we may never know? Of course there may be.
Then what are those things? Well, if we can never know them, then we’re reduced to guessing what they are and since there is an infinity of guesses that are possible to make, it’s pretty safe to say that no one has a clue about what it is that may be out there that we don’t know today or perhaps can never know, if anything is.
