Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

If God is everything

  1. Jan 3, 2004 #1
    If God is everything, then anything he concieves of must be a part of him. Therefore he cannot concieve of anything other than himself... By posting this I prove that I am concieving of something other than him- but if he is everything, I am part of him; so it's really HIM concieving of everything I concieve of.

    Even if your idea of God isn't everything, substitute some other title in for "God" that includes God and everything else- it still seems to work.

    So... What's with that?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 3, 2004 #2

    If god is everything, then that pretty much reduces god down to nothing more that "the universe" (I might be wrong but that sounds like pantheism to me). That's almost atheistic. Nothing mystical, nothing magical.

    Panentheism is a bit different. Panentheism is represented in every major religion in the world. Pantheism is not.

    (See http://websyte.com/alan/pan.htm for a quick reference.)
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2017
  4. Jan 3, 2004 #3
    my random thought

    hey, I'm an athiest, not ruling out the idea that there may be 'something' that created the universe, as it fills a hole in science, but ultimately believe that religion can only continue to explain the areas around which we can't explain ourselves and therefore it will take a long time to say it isnt a possibility (if atall). However I can raise with confidence question about the Gods that are defined in most of our present day religions- for example, if God modelled us on his image, how could he look like us if he was everything or everwhere - moreover, if we were created in his image, would that not mean he intended to create us from day one. Based on with the anthropist theory, that the universe is the way it is so that we could be created - could we not see ourselves as the ultimately beggining of the purpose of the universe, to say that what we evolve into will become something more... final, or conclusive. this doesnt seem very likely, the universe is truelly random in it's creation of anything, why would God go through alll this trouble, and hundreds of billions of years, to vcreate a race which he can send a messiah to and tell them that they have to lives 'good' lives so that our souls, which there's no scientific evidence for, will go to a place, for eternity, which cannot be physically defined (apologies, i felt like letting go)
  5. Jan 3, 2004 #4
    Right, so substitute "universe" for "God" in my post. It's still very odd, take a look at it.

    And confused_ian, I completely agree with you (although it was a little off the original topic of my post, but thats fine :P Still very interesting)
  6. Jan 3, 2004 #5
    If god is everything, but not omnipotent, then it is likely he can imagine nothing but himself. If it can think that is.
  7. Jan 3, 2004 #6
    I don't see that your B necessarilly follows from your A. The object of a thought doesn't have to actually be a real object.

    Maybe it depends on what your definition of "is" is, but i think this is a flaw in your reasoning that invalidates what follows it.
  8. Jan 3, 2004 #7
    True. However, there isn't even any SPACE outside of God, if he is everything- he's like a geometric point (the whole of existance, the whole of reality, the whole of the dimensions). If we think about a geometric point, it seems that it would not be able (due to it's lack of knowledge of dimensions that extend beyond itself) to concieve of another geometric point, of a line, of a square, etc etc- of nothing outside itself. Since God contains the entirety of all dimensions, all space, all existance (from his perspective at least, if he is everything), he will be like this geometric point. Right?
  9. Jan 3, 2004 #8
    Confused Ian, you really are confused arent you.

    You've put meaning to words which are used in different contexts. Keep in mind the Bible was transalted three times and is currently published in several different versions.

    Dont give so much power to words. When it says 'god created man in his image' - perhaps image means likeness, or similiarity, perhaps it is refering to our ability to use free will or 'image' just describes our perception (mind).

    Keep in mind that all words, even words which have been around for thousands of years have different meaning to different people. The best example I could use of this is legal terms.

    The same english word in a contract to Australia would have different legal requirements of the same contract given in America- The words are the SAME but the meanings are DIFFERENT.

    - Well, personally I jokingly think that god just got his new SIMS- Universal edition, and is having a right old good game with it. Besides, billions of years is not exactly alot of time next to eternity is it? He's got plenty of time to do what he wants.

    To Sikz. You tell me what a Thought is, and how you are able to think one, and I'll answer your question.

    Your most recent post is talking about a Deitous Heirarchy - Gods within Gods within Gods etc. Who created god? thats what you are asking there, and what is the limit to god? God is NOT A PERSON FFS. I cant believe the ignorance of the human race. God is a concept, a notion, a power, a lifeforce, THE FORCE, everywhere. Not some giant guy with a beard sitting on a gold chair inside a palace in the clouds. Get your head out of the sand.
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2004
  10. Jan 4, 2004 #9
    This thread has nothing to do with "who created God?" whatsoever. What it is is "How can an eternally closed system concieve of something other than itself, its thoughts, or possible extensions of itself?" It seems that it wouldn't be able to, yet apparently it does... Unless someone doesn't think so? Or if you agree, how does that work out?
  11. Jan 5, 2004 #10
    No heres the real brain boggler - how do you figure out you are in an externally closed system? Because once you know that you assume that there must be another system that created or closed you off, theres no easy way you can connect to it, but it doesnt mean you cant concieve that it is there...

    The only real parallel to this idea that I know of is system infrastructure in database design, programs that are closed off when they exist in larger directories etc...

    I'll change my angle. What are the boundaries of thought? Can you concieve of something that is not possible within this universe? You obviously can concieve of an external system, so tell us what you think it might be (im serious man im interested).

    The matrix 2 & 3 have ALOT of this philisophical content in them I dont know why so many ppl badmouthed the films.
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2004
  12. Jan 5, 2004 #11
    To discuss God you should read the Bible to have a source of reference and not just philosophise about God without knowing much of what has been said about him. This would be fatal because then you could end up with a "truth" that suits your beliefs. And who said that YOU are allways right? No. Read the Bible or other religious scripts to get a better insight.
  13. Jan 5, 2004 #12


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Well then you should also read the Quran and the Upanishads, and the scriptures of all the faiths, no? And travel to tribal lands to study animism?
  14. Jan 5, 2004 #13
    Were these questions addressed to me? If so, my answer is: Why not? Or do you want to make up your own god?
  15. Jan 5, 2004 #14
    Were these questions addressed to me? If so, my answer is: Why not?
    Or do you want to create your own god out of considering god?
  16. Jan 5, 2004 #15
    assumming that god is all that is, and we are aware of ourselves and concieve of god while being a part of god.

    simply, my finger is a part of me, my toe, my penis, etc. and yet i experience the world differently with each of my attributes. do i have to say that my penis and finger create two different experiences?

    for god, all that is, his/her/its experience of the universe is different through each of us. damn, god was able to experience home runs by Sosa and dunks by Jordan and thoughts by Plato. sorry gals, my mind is male dominant. god can also experience my unique recipes and views of the world. we are a part of all that is.

    this may better explain why we 'sense' that we are part of something greater than ourselves.
  17. Jan 5, 2004 #16
    Firstly I have to utterly disagree. "Phisophising" is using logic and reason to try and reach conclusions, and any God should easily be revealed through logical thought- since if there is one it created the entire universe, there should be some fingerprint-type thing.

    Secondly, I have read nearly the entire Bible, I was a VERY strong Christian untill I started to notice the vast multitude of blatant paradoxes and impossibilities in that religion. I am exceptionally familiar with several other religions as well, and have some knowledge about most (most of the larger ones, at least). What is WRITTEN about God is utterly subject to "philosophising" and logical examination, and as such doesn't hold as much weight as you seem to be implying.

    I could end up with a "truth" that suits my beliefs? What's wrong with that? No one has ever wound up with a "truth" that did NOT suit their beliefs- by acknowledging the "truth" the beliefs are changed. And what do I possess that I can use as a yardstick to see if what I think is right? All I have is what I think, what I have thought, and what I will think- those are my only instruments.
  18. Jan 6, 2004 #17
    I agree with Sikz, besides even ancient greek philosophers came to believe that the 'many gods' idea was rather foolish and they would have to be part of a larger entity - and they never got to read the bible!

    Is ALL of god in the bible? is all of god in any amount of books?
  19. Jan 6, 2004 #18
    Maybe god is logic since everything else is logic. But I think I will stop saying anything because you have to choose this yourself whether you want to believe or not. And if he exists, he is there whether you believe it or not. It's your choice.

    What is wrong with that is that you will not be sure that your "out-of-discussion-and-reasonable-thinking-constructed" god exists.
  20. Jan 6, 2004 #19
    And also I speak for my own faith, not for other beliefs.
  21. Jan 6, 2004 #20
    What if it was all originally concieved by God, in the beginning, then simply ran/run as a sorta 'program/app', see you too had a thought, yesterday, that someone else is probably thinking of today, (this post is proof of that{?}) and who is to say that God works on a level of "thoughts" in the manner we know them, there might just be another way that isn't yet obvious enough (to you) for you to accept/know it...possible?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook