His interactions, yes, not necessarily Him.
If he is in this universe doing something, then yes, him.
If there are multi-universe or multi-dimensions then they are NOT subject to OUR reality, yes?
Why wouldn't they be?
A thought experiment about what it means "to be" GOD
by Terry 143 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
PSacramento
So God created a Reality that.. can never understand him...
It is a gradual process, look at what we understood about our universe 1000 years ago, compare it to now and imagine 1000 years from now.
Did it just work out that way or did he do it on purpose... if so why...
IMO, on purpose, too much knowledge is a dangerous thing at times and I think that when one is ready, one finds the answer.
Again this is all conjecture of course.
Nothing I am stating can be proven as fact, we do NOT know if there are multiple universe or parallel dimensions or if there is a God or even if He is anything like what we Think He maybe.
-
PSacramento
If he is in this universe doing something, then yes, him.
If He is IN this universe, yes.
Why wouldn't they be?
Why should we assume that the reality of THIS universe (as we knwo it of course) applies to any other?
-
EntirelyPossible
If He is IN this universe, yes.
If he's doing something here, then it stands to reason he would be here.
Why should we assume that the reality of THIS universe (as we knwo it of course) applies to any other?
Why should you assume two universes would not be able to interact? And what does this have to do with God?
-
PSacramento
If he's doing something here, then it stands to reason he would be here.
Only at the time of interaction and even then, thatis assuming that He must be present to interact and there is no reason to think that is always the case.
Why should you assume two universes would not be able to interact? And what does this have to do with God?
If there is a parallel dimension/alternate universe that can interact with this one, why not call that universe/alternate reality "Heaven"? and if in that universe there is a being of infinit power, why not call "him" God?
-
EntirelyPossible
Only at the time of interaction and even then, thatis assuming that He must be present to interact and there is no reason to think that is always the case.
If I push a button in an elevator, I must be there to do it.
If there is a parallel dimension/alternate universe that can interact with this one, why not call that universe/alternate reality "Heaven"? and if in that universe there is a being of infinit power, why not call "him" God?
why not call it hell and call it's ruler Satan?
-
PSacramento
why not call it hell and call it's ruler Satan?
One multi-universe/parallel dimension at a time !!
LOL !
-
Terry
I think I've lost track of the discussion to the point I don't even know how to jump in :)
-
FlyingHighNow
God was God. That is something.
You defined something as itself. That's circular and not very productive.
Okay, if there was only you, would you say you are not something? It's not circular reason if we look at the statement I was commenting on.
In what sense could GOD actually EXIST? To exist you must BE something rather than nothing. How was God distinguishable from nothing?
Substitute Entirely Impossible for God in that statement.
To me, this thoughtful post of Terry's is just another way of trying to wrap our heads around there never being a beginning to God. It's like trying to bend your mind to see that there never could have been nothing because we exist in a world of something. You cannot get something from nothing. If your pantry is empty, you're not going to pull a meal out of it for you or your family.
-
EntirelyPossible
Okay, if there was only you, would you say you are not something? It's not circular reason if we look at the statement I was commenting on.
It's 100% circular no matter how you turn it.
You cannot get something from nothing. If your pantry is empty, you're not going to pull a meal out of it for you or your family.
So what is nothing?