Let's try this one.

Post Reply New Topic

It would be discourteous to Master Pedant, who graciously set up a list of actual Wittenberg theses at my request, to ignore them. I must again express my thanks for the chance to do some actual interchange of views, too rarely possible here.

At the same time, I am not perhaps the best qualified to speak to some of these, and these are not topics on which I have lectured a hundred times. So I will leave some for others, and I have taken my time deciding where and how to speak myself.

Master Pedant's D) The contradiction of transcendance and omnipresence: How can God "transcend" or be outside the physical universe while being everywhere in it at the same time? This is a contradiction in terms.

If we do not define the physical universe as all there is, then no, there is nothing contradictory here. Of course, if the physical universe we know and love is IT, and if we are talking JudaeoChristian God, not one of the formulations that claim God = Universe, then, yes, we have defined God out of existence.

There is nothing but the Universe
God is not the Universe nor PART of the Universe.
. Ergo, Kein Gott.

But I hear many physicists are these days maintaining this Universe is not the Be All and End All, and while I am sure there are many formulations and that few of them deal with God, we cannot define a God who is not the Universe out of existence.

So. Analogy [sorry, hope it does not bother you, but my style of thought and talk lean heavikly on analogy. First, a sponge in the warm waters of the Mediterranean. The sponge is surrounded by water. Water permeates each cell of the community. Water is NOT the sponge. Water is OUTSIDE the sponge. Water PERMEATES the sponge. A contradiction in terms?

Second, a leaf high on the tree. Sunlight shines down. Some of the light warms the leaf, some moves photosynthesis along, some passes through the leaf; from the underside I can see the shadow of the caterpillar crawling on the leaf. Sunlight comes from outside the leaf. Sunlight penetrates the leaf. Sunlight is NOT the leaf. Sunlight's source is OUTSIDE the leaf. Sunlight PENETRATES the leaf. Another contradiction in terms?

If God were an object, if God were delimited, transcendence might contradict omnipresence. But no JudaeoChristian theology I know of attributes object status or boundaries to God.

My professor, a very logical unimaginative person, maintained that we cannot postulate in an ancient language a feature not found in a modern and accessible language. I think this would pass his test. We can see in things with which we are familiar that A may be outside B and still permeate B.

So this, I would say, is only a paradox if one takes no more than a cursory look or if one tweaks ones definition to force the "contradictio".

Thanks for providing the opportunity; thanks for listening.

Who is Master Pedant?


What is the "list of actual Wittenberg"?


Exchanging of views is totally possible here.


Neither am I, but I am still commenting


I always speak for myself, it is the best plan of action.


Because he is god, and he can do anything, the only laws of the universe that he cannot break is time


The universe is always expanding, and there is no definition to it, so you cannot define it


Or...there could be another universe. If there are billions of galaxies, why couldn't there be billions of universes. You don't know, and you can't prove that there is just one universe.


You are right on that part, he is part of a different universe, he is not THE universe.


Yes we can, we just have to accept that he may not be in our universe.


Exactly! God is NOT the universe, but he permeates the universe. It is not a contradiction though.


Transcendence actually goes hand in hand with omnipresence. Because God can rise above normal human limits, he can be everywhere and anywhere.


Thanks for giving me an opportunity to respond.

Chrissyrun:


1. Who is Master Pedant?
Who indeed? But the reference is to the Canadian person who posts frequently around here with that monicker.


2 What is the "list of actual Wittenberg"?
Referring to Martin Luther's theses on the door of the church in Wittenberg : translation, when asked he provided a list of concrete positions available for discussion.

3 Exchanging of views is totally possible here.
I do not count "your idiocy is amazing" - "so is your arrogance" as an exchange of views. There is a bit too much of the crosstalk for my taste.

NOTE: Some of your comments from here on respond to my trying to summarize the point I am countering, in which case I often agree with you. Won't enumerate everything/

4. The universe is always expanding, and there is no definition to it, so you cannot define it
You are using "define = delimit", a perfectly proper usage, but I intended "define = specify / describe the subject under discussion."

5. Or...there could be another universe. If there are billions of galaxies, why couldn't there be billions of universes. You don't know, and you can't prove that there is just one universe.
I would not try to. does not affect my point

6. You are right on that part, he is part of a different universe, he is not THE universe.
I am not myself ready to stretch to God as part of a different universe - at least as I tend to define universe.

7. Exactly! God is NOT the universe, but he permeates the universe. It is not a contradiction though.

Precisely my point.

8. What does an ancient language have to do with the debate you were initially speaking about?
Referencing this person's principle of scientific reconstruction of history.

9. It is not a contradiction.
Precisely my point

10. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to respond.

Straight discussion always a pleasure.