The Universe is God

Shadow

Scholar
S
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
86
It is my believe that the only way God can exist and not break some serious rules is that God IS the universe. This would mean that God created everything because God IS everything it also means that Jesus could easily be his son as Jesus came from the universe. Maybe God "the universe" set up a random set of equation predtermined from previous events of the past so that Jesus through great coincedence would appear to be dead however in all actuallity be alive. Maybe Adam wasn't made in God's likeness but of God instead? Where does it say God has to be a living being? Why keeps God from being an inanimate object that just happens to be everything. The bible does say (or maybe its pop-religion) that God gave man free-will however I don't think it mentions if God has free-will. What if God doesn't have free-will what if God can't make decisions, what if God isn't alive? It just so happens that anything done is done with God if God is precieved as the universe. Maybe christian just didn't exam the possibility of thier own religion? Maybe a concoction of fables, truth, and misconnception led people to believe God isn't real when in actually you can see God is everything.

Alright one religions bull**** patched together with abstract thinking, only all the rest left. I think I did better at proving God is real than any IDist could. At the very least I didn't make you take off your watch.

If you notice any holes in my theory please let me know and I will patch them up with some more "thinking".
 
Shadow said:
This would mean that God created everything because God IS everything it also means that Jesus could easily be his son as Jesus came from the universe.
Click to expand...

I too have come from this universe and I am a reincarnation of Ganesh, thus, I am God and as God, I say you are wrong and I am right.

I win.

Okay, more seriously: Why do you believe God cannot be in this universe without breaking "some serious rules". What rules are you referring to?

If God is of this universe and Jesus could then "easily" be his son, could Adam be his son? Could I? If the universe is God, is that what we should worship, the universe? Am I allowed to pick parts of the universe that I like and worship those (like Saturn, butter, Joe Theisman, etc.)?

If tons of coincidences led to Jesus appearing to die but actually live on, did similar coincidences allow for Mohammed to succesfully start a new religion against difficult odds?
 
If God is everything, then I must be God. But where does that leave me? What if I don't want to be God? Do I have a choice?
 
Can the universe create a black hole so massive that even It cannot escape it?
 
WnWray said:
If God is everything, then I must be God. But where does that leave me? What if I don't want to be God? Do I have a choice?
Click to expand...

You are GOD mister. No if's and's or butt's about it! Now get out there and do whatever it is God's are supposed to do! :)


Actually, if this is a real philosophy, (God is universe), then I'd ask - Why call it God at all? Isn't that just confusing the issue?
 
fowlsound said:
Your theory sounds strikingly like deism.
Click to expand...
Its pantheism, actually.

Pan= all
theos= god
Pantheism= all is god

Panentheism is another interesting theory. It "states" that god is all (the universe) as well as being someone/thing beyond the universe as well. Either way, it is not Judeo-Christianity wherein God (the Father) is "I AM," pure BEING, and not the sum of all things: mass, energy, gas, thought, dung, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism
 
Last edited:
ruach1 said:
Its pantheism, actually.

Pan= all
theos= god
Pantheism= all is god

Panentheism is another interesting theory. It "states" that god is all (the universe) as well as being someone/thing beyond the universe as well. Either way, it is not Judeo-Christianity wherein God (the Father) is "I AM," pure BEING, and not the sum of all things: mass, energy, gas, thought, dung, etc.
Click to expand...



Indeed. I was confusing the deist thought that god can't control the natural law with the idea that god IS the natural law. they are different ideas.
 
If God is the universe, though, then God is not the God described in the Bible. So there's no need to try to shoehorn Adam or Jesus into it.

If you want to call the universe God, then more power to you. But it's not really that useful an equation.
 
ruach1 said:
it is not Judeo-Christianity wherein God (the Father) is "I AM," pure BEING, and not the sum of all things: mass, energy, gas, thought, dung, etc. [/URL]
Click to expand...

Although, I have also seen God's statement to Moses as "I am who am" or, to put it another way, "I am all that there is." I have not the least clue as to whether that's a reasonable translation of "Yahweh".

At any rate, there is this interesting phenomenon of consciousness that exists in the universe. I'm conscious, and although I can't prove it, I'm guessing that all of you are, too. How did this arise? From the interaction of atoms in our bodies and brains, right?

Well, then, it appears that the interaction of complex collections of matter can create consciousness. And if that is the case, then perhaps the interaction of all the matter in the entire universe creates consciousness. I can't prove that, but then again I can't prove that you are conscious either. And if the universe is itself a conscious entity, then what shall we call it? How about, "God"?

I wouldn't go so far as to say I actually believe that. However, I am at least agnostic toward it. I think it's a possibility, and it's one I find appealing.
 
Shadow said:
If you notice any holes in my theory please let me know and I will patch them up with some more "thinking".
Click to expand...
I think it's a great theory, but I agree with geetarmoore and others that it treads close to dilluting the word "god" to the point that it's no longer meaningful to talk about "god" at all.

Anthony Flew's parable of the invisible gardener addresses this same problem.
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/flew_falsification.html

How does your theory overcome the pitfalls identified by Flew?
 
Shadow said:
God IS the universe. This would mean that God created everything because God IS everything
Click to expand...

If God is omniscient and omnipotent, then God could be the universe, or could create it as a separate, self-sufficient entity. Indeed, since God could convert the universe from one form to another, at whim, and perfectly, with no discontinuities, the difference between the two becomes academic.

Like killing someone -- neglecting the pain involved, and the ethics of stopping someone's existence, it is otherwise no big deal, to him, since he can resurrect them at will, regardless of how thoroughly their bodies are destroyed, their information lost, the existant mind stopped.
 
Meadmaker
Although, I have also seen God's statement to Moses as "I am who am" or, to put it another way, "I am all that there is." I have not the least clue as to whether that's a reasonable translation of "Yahweh".
Click to expand...

It is. The name "Yahweh" is a derivative of the Hebrew word "hayah" which means "to be." Thus, Judeo-Christian theologians (possibly others) have concluded that "God" has revealed God's Self to Moses (and to the world) as BEING, pure BEING, I AM, SPIRIT, and specifically not the wind, air, dirt, sky, stars, animals, dung, etc. Creator is not the created in J-C theology, and this would be "orthodox."


Well, then, it appears that the interaction of complex collections of matter can create consciousness. And if that is the case, then perhaps the interaction of all the matter in the entire universe creates consciousness. I can't prove that, but then again I can't prove that you are conscious either. And if the universe is itself a conscious entity, then what shall we call it? How about, "God"?
Click to expand...
We are free to believe as we see fit, and you have the right to call the above bolded God. However, I would think it would be more likely that people are going to call it Gaia, or a universal Gaia principle. Additionally it is not Taoism, because Taoism proper does not render the Tao to be conscious, self-reflective, caring of itself and others, because, as is well known, "the Tao is silent." However, a universal holism which has transcendental properties seems to have Tao-like properties.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I actually believe that. However, I am at least agnostic toward it. I think it's a possibility, and it's one I find appealing.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't be alone in this regard. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom