I have this feeling that one of the best ways to define God would simply be to apprehend God as everything that exists.

But everything that exists is, I might very carefully say – the expressed form of a formless idea. That ultimate formless idea, again, I may apprehend as the infinite mind of Existence itself: thus again that Existence itself is God and thus again that God is everything that exists.

Within this construct one can readily apprehend the notion of omnipresence – for if God is everything that exists, then God is omnipresent. This construct also provides a basis for omniscience and omnipotence.

Now with utmost care let me place a caveat: I state the foregoing merely to invite thoughts from others – for I am firmly aware that it is not necessarily true: to wit – an expression of something is not necessarily the thing itself –

- Thus if everything that exists is the expressed form of a formless idea – then that Formless Idea is what is God – and not the expressed forms.

This would mean that God as the ultimate formless idea is absolutely intangible, inexpressible, ineffable, inapproachable, incomprehensible and non-substantiate in a way that renders God – careful with this one now – almost non-existent: that is – to the finite mind.

Now this brings altogether different premises to the questions of omnipresence, omnipotence and omniscience.

But before going further and confusing myself anymore – let me delve to the purpose of this thread.

Quote from M_Nwankwo –

Maybe when the opportunity presents itself, I will offer a detailed explanation of my perception of what omnipotence and omniscience are.

I would be most obliged if you could share those perspectives sir.

I would also like to invite the Christian perspective of the OMNI attributes of God.

Warm regards;

D.S.

I think the whole Omni thing is just to make "God" out to be "supremely supreme".  I wouldn't put too much on those.  "God" may be very powerful, but not all powerful, very knowledgeable, but not all knowing.  God could be great enough to create and sustain the Universe and have us totally in awe of him/her, but still not powerful enough to do absolutely everything. . .

I think there are too many possibilities when trying to define something that probably doesn't even exist. If u can imagine it, it could be valid.

Also there is the incompatibility of God's omnipotence and omniscience, cos as omniscient, he already has set out his future actions, thus unable to change his mind despite being omnipotent. our perception of the entity god can only be drawn from speculation, whether he is almighty or not.

Krayola:

I think the whole Omni thing is just to make "God" out to be "supremely supreme".  I wouldn't put too much on those.  "God" may be very powerful, but not all powerful, very knowledgeable, but not all knowing.  God could be great enough to create and sustain the Universe and have us totally in awe of him/her, but still not powerful enough to do absolutely everything. . .

It is interesting when you state - "but still not powerful enough to do absolutely everything. . . " - Because I would have imagined that this could only apply to a finite or limited being.

If we philosophize in existential terms, we must commence with that with brought ALL existence into being - or better put (since "existence" as a concept is possibly eternal and without a beginning - perhaps we might say - "that factor which is responsible for ALL EXISTENCE."

If there is a being or entity that is responsible for such: then such a being cannot conceivably be limited or finite - because it would itself be the fountain of ALL things. Accordingly ther ecould be nothing that could be closed to it. This is for me the essential of omnipotence.

I might put it differently by stating that what you have set forth would apply only if the universe was in fact created by a finite being - perhaps some super-developed alien/ extra-terrestial so advanced that it has mastered the art of creating whole universes. This would however not be a reference to God - for by "God" - we refer to the uncaused cause of ALL existence - which as such cannot be limited in any way given that it is the cause and principle of ALL existence.

I need to clarify that in the foregoing post, the concept of omnipotence of an unlimited entity that is responsible for ALL existence does not extend to a capacity to perform pure illogicalities.

I believe that a pure illogicallity cannot exist on any dimension.

God is responsible for all that exists - this in itself presupposes a responsiblity only for things that exist and not things that do not exist.

Pure illogicalities, in my view, do not exist.

Are u saying that God created ALL existence, therefore he can do, and knows, absolutely everything?


- If nothing exists, neither can God. What state of being is this "God" in if he does not exist. A non existent entity is just that. (He is necessary is not a valid argument IMO)

- God may have brought ALL into existence by accident. . . A mistake, a fluke. and have no idea what to do with, or about it.

- I don't think it follows follow that if God created ALL that exists (including himself   out of nothing, not even thin air ), he is all knowing and all powerful.

^^^ Is it really conceivable for an immaterial entity to be responsible for ALL that exists, and conversely not be aware of somethings that exist?

Is that not an illogicality?

What is, IMO, inconceivable is for a nonexistent entity to do anything. If nothing exists, neither can God. I think that is pretty simple.

Does God exist? If so, he did not bring ALL into existence. That is what i'm saying.

Also, being aware of all that exists, does not equate to being in control of all that exists.

^^^ Brilliant.

Krayola:

What is, IMO, inconceivable is for a nonexistent entity to do anything. If nothing exists, neither can God. I think that is pretty simple.

What do you make of what I had earlier said - "But everything that exists is, I might very carefully say – the expressed form of a formless idea. That ultimate formless idea, again, I may apprehend as the infinite mind of Existence itself: thus again that Existence itself is God and thus again that God is everything that exists."

Is an idea, or better put - a principle -  something that exists?

Does God exist? If so, he did not bring ALL into existence. That is what i'm saying.

Again, what do you apprehend by the term "a principle?" Is it not possible for a principle to be the rationale for itself?

The God principle is, in my view, the rationale for itself and for all existent things.

Also, being aware of all that exists, does not equate to being in control of all that exists.

This would depend on what the God Principle is. I have already stated that I do not believe pure illogicalities can exist. Everything must be anchored on a self-existent principle, the ultimate self-existent principle being God.

Now these principles key-in in sets and patterns and therefore it is not possible in my view, for a reason-less thing to exist.

In summary, if something DOES exist, then ot must be subject to the ultimate principle - which is the God principle, and this for me grounds the idea of omnipotence.

But let us again note that this does not extend to pure illogicalities, which i earlier stated i do not believe exist at all. Examples -

   1. A shape which is a perfect circle and a perfect square

   2. For God to create a stone that is impossible for God to lift and then proceed to lift it

   3. For a self-existent thing or principle to cease to exist.

I do not believe that the foregoing examples are possible for even an omnipotent God. This is because omnipotence, in my view, concerns and governs existent things. The foregoing are pure illogicalities which do not and cannot exist at all.

@ deepsight. I cant answer in detailed point form cause I'm very busy and only "sneakin" in to make short posts. But i don't think existence could have been brought into being by anything, whether an idea, principle, or whatever. Whatever it is would have had to "exist" in some form or some realm or whatever. So, IMO, existence is a given. Stuff exists, we know that, and where existence comes from isn't something I think we can think our way to.

I think what we should just say is that our universe exists and has a creator. If that is the starting point, and we agree to accept those premises as true, just for the sake of debate, then we can see what we can infer, from the universe, about the creator.  the whole ALL of existence thing won't work cause we'll keep going back to the question of what created God, and how could non existence bring about existence.

I can accept, just for the sake of debate, that the Universe was brought into being by a very powerful and intelligent something. Whether it is all powerful and omnieverything, me i no know o. But from what I see it was powerful enough to create, but not to sustain in a way that I think makes it worthy of total, absolute adoration or respect. . . but that is just from my own vantage point which I agree may be limited.

But everything that exists is, I might very carefully say – the expressed form of a formless idea. That ultimate formless idea, again, I may apprehend as the infinite mind of Existence itself: thus again that Existence itself is God and thus again that God is everything that exists.

This assertion is correct. John 1:3 says - All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.

The Psalmist also says to God in Ps 139:16 - Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. God says to Jeremiah in[b] Jer 1:5 [/b]-  “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Within this construct one can readily apprehend the notion of omnipresence – for if God is everything that exists, then God is omnipresent. This construct also provides a basis for omniscience and omnipotence.
This would mean that God as the ultimate formless idea is absolutely intangible, inexpressible, ineffable, inapproachable, incomprehensible and non-substantiate in a way that renders God – careful with this one now – almost non-existent: that is – to the finite mind.

This is also true. The human mind is finite, and there are many things beyond our understanding. The Bible was already clear on this, long before philosophers decided to discuss it. The fallacy of science is to assume everything can be understood, proven and evidenced as theories. This is despite the fact that a theory, by its very definition is constantly subject to revision and change, as more is known about its subject matter. Despite this, scientic theories are generally accepted as fact.

This is what the Bible says about our finite minds -
Rom 11:13 says - "Oh, how great are God's riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand his decisions and his ways!"
Job 11:17 says - "Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty?
Job 37:5 says - "God's voice thunders in marvelous ways; he does great things beyond our understanding.

But from what I see it was powerful enough to create, but not to sustain in a way that I think makes it worthy of total, absolute adoration or respect.

The Sun self sustains via nuclear fission, the Earth self sustains though a combination of Plate Tectonics, Earthquakes, Volcanic Activity, Weather Patterns, Seasons, Convection Currents, Sea Currents, Chemical cycles, Various reproductive cycles of plants, animals and micro organisms - The natural laws of Physics, Motion and Thermodynamics reinforce these principles.

In fact, the beauty and intricacy of life on planet Earth is almost unfathomable. The Ozone layer protects us from harmful Ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, the Earths Magnetosphere protects us from the Sun's solar wind - coincidence? i think not.
Since the creation of the Earth, no matter been created. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Anything "discovered" was already here. The Laws of Thermodynamics confirm this - coincidence? I think not.

Romeo4real:


This is also true. The human mind is finite, and there are many things beyond our understanding. The Bible was already clear on this, long before philosophers decided to discuss it. The fallacy of science is to assume everything can be understood, proven and evidenced as theories. This is despite the fact that a theory, by its very definition is constantly subject to revision and change, as more is known about its subject matter. Despite this, scientic theories are generally accepted as fact.

The fallacy of religion is that it keeps telling people that there are some things that can never be known or will forever  remain a mystery. . . .It we were to go by the religious books, we would not have discovered, all what we know today, we would still be praying to gods to help us cure diseases, we will still be looking at the stars and wondering what they are. . . .Thanks to science we know so much about our selves, our planet, the solar system and the universe at large. . . .Left for religion alone people will never go to space for fear of some the crazy idea that some imaginary god will smack them down. . .Science alone is what made man go up into space(far higher than the mythical tower of babel). . . .Science still remains and will forever remain the only universal hope for humanity, not religion and imaginary gods. . . . .If a destructive asteroid is approaching the earth, scientific knowledge is what will be put to use to either destroy it before it makes impact or make it change its course, not god or any religion. . . .

This is what the Bible says about our finite minds -
Rom 11:13 says - "Oh, how great are God's riches and wisdom and knowledge! How impossible it is for us to understand his decisions and his ways!"
Job 11:17 says - "Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty?
Job 37:5 says - "God's voice thunders in marvelous ways; he does great things beyond our understanding.

We have heard this excuse so many times already. . .It is the same finite human minds that do every thing for all the gods, no? Its the same human minds that wrote the books and words of all gods, the same finite human minds that are still spreading the word of all the gods, doing everything for the gods. . . .No god has ever done anything for himself. . .yet it is the human mind that is finite and the god/gods that have never done anything are infinite. . . .

mazaje:



The fallacy of religion is that it keeps telling people that there are some things that can never be known or will forever  remain a mystery. . . .It we were to go by the religious books, we would not have discovered, all what we know today, we would still be praying to gods to help us cure diseases, we will still be looking at the stars and wondering what they are. . . .Thanks to science we know so much about our selves, our planet, the solar system and the universe at large. . . .Left for religion alone people will never go to space for fear of some the crazy idea that some imaginary god will smack them down. . .Science alone is what made man go up into space(far higher than the mythical tower of babel). . . .Science still remains and will forever remain the only universal hope for humanity, not religion and imaginary gods. . . . .If a destructive asteroid is approaching the earth, scientific knowledge is what will be put to use to either destroy it before it makes impact or make it change its course, not god or any religion. . . .

1. what has religion told u that u can never know? or how has religion stopped u from obtaining knowledge? the problem with folks like u is that u use science to shield ur imaginary digust for God. science is NOT an alternative to God. There has been no scientific theory, notion or evidence that suggests that we live in an uncreated universe.

2. One wonders if u actually read the bible. . .and if u do, do u understand the contents. The scriptures actually encourages us to use medicines and other scientific means to solve literal problems. why? this is because we believe that God in His infinite mercy has helped our cause and aided us with inspirations to make a difference on our planet. This difference explains the medicinal cure for diseases.

3. science however, like any other human concept has loads of limitations. Some of this limitations include its inability to find cure to several diseases that is plunging this planet. Its inability to profer a plausible explanation to the origin of life? The source of human life.

4. I laugh in tongues how does going into space oppose religious knowledge? did man see God on getting into space. The tower of babel was not cast down because of the building itself, but because of the intent of such. what was the intent of going into space? was it to find God? did they get to see God?

5. The problem here has to do with ur personal spiritual death. . . .ur inability to perceive that the future is already written and determined. We are all but players.

We have heard this excuse so many times already. . .It is the same finite human minds that do every thing for all the gods, no? Its the same human minds that wrote the books and words of all gods, the same finite human minds that are still spreading the word of all the gods, doing everything for the gods. . . .No gdo has ever done anything for himself. . .yet it is the human mind that is finite and the god/gods that have never done anything are infinite. . . .

Perhaps u could start by admitting that u know next to nothing about God.

@ mazaje. U know there is a strong case that science is doin more damage than religion.

Pollution eg that oil spill gush that is dumping 200000 barrels of crude a day into natural habitats.
Nukes and weapons of mass destruction. From guns to missiles
Mass media dictating how people think (public opinion can be programmed to a significant extent)
etc

There is a real possibility that we can wipe ourselves off the face of the earth. Thanks to science.

Since the industrial revolution we have done so much damage to the earth,  and live with the threat of some nuke Fallin into wrong hands. In hundreds of thousands of years, not a quarter of that kinda damage had been done to the ecosystem, and no such immediate threat to humanity existed as nukes floating around.

How sustainable is the "progress" science has brought? If it isn't sustainable, is it really progress?

Krayola:

@ mazaje. U know there is a strong case that science is doin more damage than religion.

Pollution eg that oil spill gush that is dumping 200000 barrels of crude into natural habitats.
Nukes and weapons of mass destruction. From guns to missiles
Mass media dictating how people think (public opinion can be programmed to a significant extent)
etc

There is a real possibility that we can wipe ourselves off the face of the earth. Thanks to science.

Since the industrial revolution we have done so much damage to the earth,  and live with the threat of some nuke Fallin into wrong hands. In hundreds of thousands of years, not a quarter of that kinda damage had been done to the ecosystem, and no such immediate threat to humanity existed as nukes floating around.

How sustainable is the "progress" science has brought? If it isn't sustainable, is it really progress?

My argument was that science remains the best way for humanity to better learn about themselves and the universe in an objective manner. . . .Romeo asserted that science has a fallacy which is that everything can be known. . . .I just don't understand how that is a fallacy. . . . .And I gave example to show that if we were to go by religious principles alone human would not have discovered electricity. . . .Of course science like any man made endeavor has its own bad sides, but it still remains the only hope for humanity when it comes to solving its problems. . . . .

Ok, But a similar argument works for religion. Yeah, some religious people are messed up, and some do crazy stuff for religion, but most religious people are not crazy, and will tell u they benefit a lot from their faith. Can't u just take their word for it?

Krayola:

Ok, But a similar argument works for religion. Yeah, some religious people are messed up, and some do crazy stuff for religion, but most religious people are not crazy, and will tell u they benefit a lot from their faith. Can't u just take their word for it?

As far as mazaje is concerned, all religious peeps are deluded.

noetic17:

As far as mazaje is concerned, all religious peeps are deluded. 

hey. . I kinda agree with him.  but people do have a right to be deluded in peace 

Krayola:

hey. . I kinda agree with him.  but people do have a right to be deluded in peace 

The only problem is that even the non-religious are also guilty of this DELUSION

Hi Noetic. . . can you share what your understanding is of the omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience of God. . .?

Thanks.

Krayola:


I can accept, just for the sake of debate, that the Universe was brought into being by a very powerful and intelligent something. Whether it is all powerful and omnieverything, me i no know o. But from what I see it was powerful enough to create, but not to sustain in a way that I think makes it worthy of total, absolute adoration or respect. . . but that is just from my own vantage point which I agree may be limited.

This can only be an acceptable starting point if we assume that THIS universe is ALL that EXISTS.

I cannot accept that as a starting premise in any terms.

The universe, IMO, may be all we know for sure that exists. Let's start from what we know for sure, and take careful steps toward what we don't know. Instead of just mAking all sorts of leaps and making statements that we can't back up.

We shouldn't keep pretending we have The answers, especially when we know the "answers" fall apart when critiqued. Abi?

I do not understand what you are saying.

1. Do non-physical things exist?

2. If they do, are they contingent on the physical universe?

3. If they are not: then please we can readily see that "existence" is a compound word which transcends the physical universe.

At all events, whatever brought matter into existence cannot itself be matter - that is a prime logical reverse.

Accordingly there is irrefutably more to existence than the physical universe.

If this is the case, we cannot limit the powers of that which is responsible for all existence to an analysis of a physical universe.

Never mind

@ deepsight. Can u please give me examples of these non physical things that u mean? And please if u are asking me questions, try not to answer them too, on my behalf, and then draw conclusions based on answers that did not come from me. Thanks

Romeo asserted that science has a fallacy which is that everything can be known

It is a fallacy to assume a finite construct can comprehend infinite phenomena. Science is constantly adjusting it theories and hypothesis to fit with recent discoveries. Science is constantly creating new terms and constructs to explain itself out of holes it previously dug - And this is just in the Physical world.

Science discounts tha spiritual world altogether, because it cannot explain it. Science attempt to explain the Supernatural and Paranormal using criteria devised for the physical world - No wonder it fails.
It is clear there is a spiritual dimension to this physical world, and ethereal plane, where physical or natural laws do not apply. This has nothing to do with any religion, though the Bible make it clear that it exists, and it is evidenced is all religions worldwide. The Law of Karma is a spiritual law which science would be at pains to explain. Far Eastern principles of Qi or Chi, Yin and Yang, Feng Shui are based in spirituality. Science has long accepted that Acupressure and Acupuncture are indeed real and viable, though there is no convincing scientific argument that explains how they work.

Philosophers have long understood, that lack of evidence, is not evidence itself. Someday, science will catch up.

Romeo4real:

It is a fallacy to assume a finite construct can comprehend infinite phenomena. Science is constantly adjusting it theories and hypothesis to fit with recent discoveries. Science is constantly creating new terms and constructs to explain itself out of holes it previously dug - And this is just in the Physical world

Recent discoveries like what?. . . .I thought the scientific process is what is discovering things. . . .When was the last time religion discovered any new element, new planet or new method of curing diseases?. . . .The last I checked religionist are the ones trying to use scientific discoveries and assign to their various gods. . . .Now we have christians that are saying that the creation account in genesis is an allegory, and claiming that their god created the big bang. . . .

Science discounts tha spiritual world altogether, because it cannot explain it. Science attempt to explain the Supernatural and Paranormal using criteria devised for the physical world - No wonder it fails.

Supernatural, paranormal. . . .Science has also failed in explaining alien abduction. . . .Ohh how sad. . . .

It is clear there is a spiritual dimension to this physical world, and ethereal plane, where physical or natural laws do not apply. This has nothing to do with any religion, though the Bible make it clear that it exists, and it is evidenced is all religions worldwide. The Law of Karma is a spiritual law which science would be at pains to explain. Far Eastern principles of Qi or Chi, Yin and Yang, Feng Shui are based in spirituality. Science has long accepted that Acupressure and Acupuncture are indeed real and viable, though there is no convincing scientific argument that explains how they work.

Philosophers have long understood, that lack of evidence, is not evidence itself. Someday, science will catch up.

What exactly is natural and what is supernatural?. . . .What exactly is the law of karma?. . . .I am NOT saying that a spiritual dimension does not exists, even though I have never objectively experienced any, but why ascribe strange phenomenon to some spiritual dimensions?. . . .Long time ago diseases were said to be caused by demons, evil spirits and gods, no?

Krayola:

@ deepsight. Can u please give me examples of these non physical things that u mean? And please if u are asking me questions, try not to answer them too, on my behalf, and then draw conclusions based on answers that did not come from me. Thanks

1. Infinite Space

2. Infinite Time

3. Idea

4. Mind.

I am sorely tempted to elucidate, but you have warned me.

So: your ball.

Romeo4real:

It is clear there is a spiritual dimension to this physical world, and ethereal plane, where physical or natural laws do not apply.

Hi Romeo -

Do you think that different laws apply in different realms?

My perception is that the laws within ALL creation - on ALL realms - are the same eternal laws of God - which simply have different manifestations.

Not different laws. A slight example would be magnetism in the physical - it could manifest as Karma in the spiritual - but it really is the same primordial Law of Attraction at work.

Given this context, do you perceive the the omnipotence of God only works in terms of given primordial and unchangeable precepts. . . what is your view. . . ?

@ deepsight. From what I know space and time are physical phenomena, ideas are generated by physical entities, and what u call a mind needs a brain or some kinda data apprehension and processing system.

I think those things u listed may be intangible, I.e not percievable by the senses, but IMO we have no good reason to believe they exist outside our universe.

Would love to explain what I mean a bit more but typin on my phone is just drama. I hope u understand what I mean tho.

I believe there are Physical Realms, and Spiritual Realms. Subsequently there are Physical Laws and Spiritual Realms to govern them respectively. Both realms/ laws, whilst separate and distinct, are interconnected and influence each other.
Certain existential things - our physical beings,  emotions, actions, responsibilities, and thoughts, is what creates this interconnection. Though occurring in the physical realm, they do have a spiritual dimension to them.

In other words, there is a interdependence between of all phenomena and a correlation between mutually conditioning causes and effects.
This belief is formulated by the principle of dependent origination, also referred to as the law of conditionality, the causal nexus that operates in all phenomena - Spiritual, Physical, Psychological, and Moral

Examples of physical laws are Gravity, Motion, Thermodynamics, Conservation, Magnetism, various Chemical Laws etc. These laws are necessary and crucial for the Earth to function and sustain itself as God intended.
Examples of Spiritual Laws are - Law of Love, Law of Giving and Receiving, Law of Cause and Effect, The Law of Cycles, Law of Balance, Law of Forgiveness, Law of Faith, Law or Service, Law of Prayer and Meditation, Law of Grace, Law of Will of God. There are many more, and some are related and emanate from another.

In the spiritual realm, these laws govern the spiritual aspects of our existence, consciousness and our world, thereby having an effect, or manifestation in the physical realm. I also believe, as most religions do, that an effect manifest in the Physical Realm, has its causation within the Spiritual Realm - especially regarding the existential things i mentioned earlier. Practitioners of traditional Chinese Medicine have long understood this connection.

The Bible is also very clear on this spiritual dimension, and goes further to demarcate them into Good and Evil. It explains there are Principalities and Powers in heavenly places, but there are also Rulers, Authorities, Spiritual forces of Evil, Dark Powers, who are not flesh and blood, and who wrestle and contend with us.

Limiting God's omnipotence to primordial and unchangeable precepts would mean He is not truly omnipotent, as he would be limited - unless the limit is self imposed, or goes against His very nature. His power can be described as absolute and ordinate. Absolute meaning - that which God is able to do that which he will not do, but is possible to be done. Ordinate meaning -  That which God decreed to use, or which he has ordained or appointed to be exercised. 
Both are divine power. God's omnipotence is that ability and strength by which he can bring to pass whatsoever pleases him, whatever his infinite wisdom can direct, and what his infinite purity can resolve. Power is not an act, but the ability to bring a something into act, to produce or affect something.