Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(June 2, 2016 at 2:52 pm)SteveII Wrote: Do you think there might be more to the concept than the 6 word phrase you got from an internet dictionary entry? I found this in literally 60 seconds:
Judeo-Christian beliefs constitute a third opinion on omnipresence. To both mainstream Jewish and Christian religions, God is omnipresent. However, the major difference between these monotheistic religions and other religious systems is that God is still transcendent to His creation and yet immanent in relating to creation. God is not immersed in the substance of creation, even though he is able to interact with it as he chooses. He cannot be excluded from any location or object in creation.[6] God's presence is continuous throughout all of creation, though it may not be revealed in the same way at the same time to people everywhere. At times, he may be actively present in a situation, while he may not reveal that he is present in another circumstance in some other area. The Bible states that God can be both present to a person in a manifest manner (Psalm 46:1, Isaiah 57:15) as well as being present in every situation in all of creation at any given time (Psalm 33:13-14). Specifically, Oden states (pg. 68-69) that the Bible shows that God can be present in every aspect of human life:
God is naturally present in every aspect of the natural order, in every level of causality, every fleeting moment and momentous event of natural history...(Psalm 8:3, Isaiah 40:12, Nahum 1:3)
God is actively present in a different way in every event in history as provident guide of human affairs (Psalm 48:7)
God is in a special way attentively present to those who call upon his name, intercede for others, who adore God, who petition, who pray earnestly for forgiveness (Gospel of Matthew 18:19, Book of Acts 17:27)
God is judicially present in moral awareness, through conscience (Psalm 48:1-2, Epistle to the Romans 1:20)
God is bodily present in the incarnation of his Son, Jesus Christ (Gospel of John 1:14, Colossians 2:9)
God is mystically present in the Eucharist, and through the means of grace in the church, the body of Christ (Ephesians 2:12, John 6:56)
God is sacredly present and becomes known in special places where God chooses to meet us, places that become set apart by the faithful remembering community (1 Corinthians 11:23-29) where it may said: "Truly the Lord is in this place" (Genesis 28:16, Matthew 18:20)"
Perhaps there is something in there that you would like to reasonably discuss?
Sure - how is any of that anything other than word salad, designed to confuse simple people with outlandish language, so that they don't ask further questions? God is "mysitically", or "sacredly" present? LOL - are you kidding me?
Sure - you can make up all sorts of outlandish nonsense, if you're not bound by reality and testability of your claims. But - before you start explaining how words have different meaning than usual, when applied to your imaginary friend - how about you show that this entity even exists?
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
(June 2, 2016 at 3:08 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote: Sure - how is any of that anything other than word salad, designed to confuse simple people with outlandish language,
People like you have no integrity. You defend a logical argument that you say disproves god and then when someone who actually knows good philosophy destroys your schoolboy objection you pout and cry "word salad."
June 2, 2016 at 3:25 pm (This post was last modified: June 2, 2016 at 3:31 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(June 2, 2016 at 2:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:
(June 2, 2016 at 2:21 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: I know that the moon is orbiting the Earth, doesn't mean I'm on the moon.
You're thinking of it in terms of the material world though.
Remember, we believe God is in an entirely different dimension all together and isn't bound by the laws of time or space. No, God isn't "physically present" in your butt hole as you would be or wouldn't be on the moon. You know the moon is orbiting the Earth, but you can't see all of it all at once at all times and don't know what is happening on it at every second, so that's not comparable either. We believe God is a much more advanced being than us and so He is capable of things that we cannot even fully comprehend. Just as a chicken cannot comprehend concepts that we as humans can.
If God exists in such a way that it is beyond comprehension, then I don't know how you know that or how you can begin to make such claims about God's capabilities if you yourself can't comprehend what those capabilities are, or how you can believe you know anything about God if it is entirely unknowable. Those capabilities, as they've been described, are that God exists outside of the universe while being present in all parts of the universe, without being physically present in the universe while being capable of interacting with the universe while still not existing within it. At this point, what difference is there between incomprehensible and incoherent?
The way I interpret it is this: either Hell is a separation from god, destroying his omnipresence, OR god is present even in Hell. If the latter is the case, this means that God watches and observes the billions in Hell burning and crying and writhing in agony, without taking action to save them. Which by extension means that God is either a) not all-loving, as he will not save those experiencing eternal pain and suffering, or b) he cannot act, thus making him not all-powerful.
(June 2, 2016 at 3:13 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I seem to remember something about pigeons....
You've had millennia to think this shit through, yet all evidence points to a continual invention.
Continual invention implies adding new things. I do not think that is the case.
Couple of reasons some doctrines might have changed over the past 2000 years:
Advances in philosophy in general and philosophy of religion specifically.
Advances in natural theology and its importance.
Advances in our understanding of the universe and our place in it.
Decentralization of theological thought. Now we have many more sects and denominations that bring out variations in thought and prompt reexamination of ideas.
There are some doctrines that cannot be changed lest Christianity ceases to be Christianity (for example the doctrine of Salvation). The one under scrutiny in this thread probably hasn't changed much other than to fill in what it means and/or to articulate it in more sophisticated language.
(June 2, 2016 at 2:58 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: You're thinking of it in terms of the material world though.
Remember, we believe God is in an entirely different dimension all together and isn't bound by the laws of time or space. No, God isn't "physically present" in your butt hole as you would be or wouldn't be on the moon. You know the moon is orbiting the Earth, but you can't see all of it all at once at all times and don't know what is happening on it at every second, so that's not comparable either. We believe God is a much more advanced being than us and so He is capable of things that we cannot even fully comprehend. Just as a chicken cannot comprehend concepts that we as humans can.
If God exists in such a way that it is beyond comprehension, then I don't know how you know that or how you can begin to make such claims about God's capabilities if you yourself can't comprehend what those capabilities are, or how you can believe you know anything about God if it is entirely unknowable. Those capabilities, as they've been described, are that God exists outside of the universe while being present in all parts of the universe, without being physically present in the universe while being capable of interacting with the universe while still not existing within it. At this point, what difference is there between incomprehensible and incoherent?
If there is a God, it only makes perfect sense that he is much more advanced than us and is capable of things and concepts that we cannot comprehend. Just as creatures below us cannot comprehend concepts that we can. I don't know why you would think that's so strange.
As for how I can believe in God, that would be a topic for another thread, if I wanted to get into it... which I'd rather not.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
June 2, 2016 at 3:46 pm (This post was last modified: June 2, 2016 at 3:59 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(June 2, 2016 at 3:42 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:
(June 2, 2016 at 3:25 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: If God exists in such a way that it is beyond comprehension, then I don't know how you know that or how you can begin to make such claims about God's capabilities if you yourself can't comprehend what those capabilities are, or how you can believe you know anything about God if it is entirely unknowable. Those capabilities, as they've been described, are that God exists outside of the universe while being present in all parts of the universe, without being physically present in the universe while being capable of interacting with the universe while still not existing within it. At this point, what difference is there between incomprehensible and incoherent?
If there is a God, it only makes perfect sense that he is much more advanced than us and is capable of things and concepts that we cannot comprehend. Just as creatures below us cannot comprehend concepts that we can. I don't know why you would think that's so strange.
As for how I can believe in God, that would be a topic for another thread, if I wanted to get into it... which I'd rather not.
While a chicken can't "understand" a human, a human is both observable and beholden to the same natural laws as the chicken.
Also I don't see how not making sense is a good argument for God's existence if you intend to affirm its existence.
(June 2, 2016 at 3:42 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: If there is a God, it only makes perfect sense that he is much more advanced than us and is capable of things and concepts that we cannot comprehend. Just as creatures below us cannot comprehend concepts that we can. I don't know why you would think that's so strange.
As for how I can believe in God, that would be a topic for another thread, if I wanted to get into it... which I'd rather not.
While a chicken can't "understand" a human, a human is both observable and beholden to the same natural laws as the chicken.
Sure, but that's not the argument I was making. I never said chickens are exactly to us as we are to God. I was simply showing that it's not unreasonable to say we don't have the mental capacity to understand certain concepts pertaining to a higher being, since it is the case with the creatures in our own world.
Quote:Also I don't know how not making sense is a good argument for God's existence.
Hm? I didn't realize I was giving any argument for God's existence, much less using "not making sense" as one lol. Merely trying to explain what we have in mind when we use the term omnipresent in reference to God.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
