Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jobar · 09-16-2002, 05:26 PM

While reading Marcion's thread about the transcendent evil of Hell, it occured to me that even were we to allow the clear paradox created by omnibenevolence and Hell, we still could not call it logically conceivable. Omnipresence- the one often left out when the properties of God are listed- means that there can be no place where God is *not*. And even for those who try to postulate a Hell which is merely the absence of God, Hell becomes paradoxical.

I think I have heard arguments which deny that God is omnipresent. Do we have any theists here who can expand on that?

tronvillain · 09-16-2002, 06:53 PM

Well, the attributes of omniscience and omnipotence can be seen as producing omnipresence without requiring that one actually be everywhere.

Keith Russell · 09-16-2002, 07:01 PM

Tron:

I think omnipresence goes even further than 'being' everywhere. The law of identity, which states that a thing is what it is, pretty much means that either 'God' would not only be everywhere, 'God' would have to be everything, or not be omnipresent.

If the Law of Identity is correct, and I believe that it is, then something could not be itself, and be 'God' at the same time.

Since two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time, anywhere there was something other than 'God', there would be no 'God' there.

Clearly, the idea of 'God' contradicts what we know to be true about reality.

(And, what we know of reality also contradicts 'God'.)

Keith.

Uni-Universe · 09-17-2002, 12:27 PM

What we know of reality contradicts what we believe to be the characteristics of God.

Who really says that we are "right" at all about this concept called "God"? Who says that we know enough scientifically about reality etc. to make the assumption that it contradicts "God's" existence? Clearly we have so much more to learn about the universe. A place where the light of God doesn't touch (hell) would have to be a Void, a place without energy. Does such a place exist? If so, perhaps in another dimension? There are so many ideas or theories.

tronvillain · 09-17-2002, 01:49 PM

Keith, again the attributes of omnipotence and omniscience would seem to confer omnipresence without actually being everywhere or being everything.

hinduwoman · 09-17-2002, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Uni-Universe:
What we know of reality contradicts what we believe to be the characteristics of God.

Who really says that we are "right" at all about this concept called "God"? Who says that we know enough scientifically about reality etc. to make the assumption that it contradicts "God's" existence? Clearly we have so much more to learn about the universe. A place where the light of God doesn't touch (hell) would have to be a Void, a place without energy. Does such a place exist? If so, perhaps in another dimension? There are so many ideas or theories.

There is one thing in common with all these theories --- none of them have an iota of proof.

Ron Singh · 09-17-2002, 05:18 PM

HELl is how we relate to God. The less able we are to relate to God, the less of him we experience.

Philosoft · 09-17-2002, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ron Singh:
HELl is how we relate to God. The less able we are to relate to God, the less of him we experience.

Again, I ask how this scenario differs from what I experience now? Am I relating to God but just don't know it?

Jobar · 09-17-2002, 07:01 PM

I wish that Albert Cipriani still posted here- I'd be interested in hearing his take on this.

I tried to demonstrate to Albert that omnipresence also played hell (

) with the concepts of free will and the immortal soul, much as does omniscience. If God is within us, every cell, every neuron- then how can 'we' be said to be separate from 'him'?

I recently had a spirited discussion with a real live fundie, a woman I have known for many years, who somehow had never found out I am an unbeliever. I thought for a while I was simply going to have to tell her to leave my house- all the rational arguments I used either went over her head or were ignored, and she would keep right on preaching. Finally I asked her, "Where IS God?" She responded (eventually), "Everywhere!" So I pursued that, and asked if He was in our bodies, our thoughts- our souls. At that point she boggled- I guess she never thought of the fact that if God is omnipresent, where is left for *her*? When I asked if SHE was God- well, I wish I had had a video camera. The expression on her face was priceless!

09-17-2002, 07:19 PM

Omnipresence has nothing to do with "being everywhere." Omnipresence requires presence first and omnipresence just means that everything is God to the same extent that it can be God or that it can be the continuity of God.

Existence IS just as God IS and they are one and the same. Hence, "this is Buddha" or "this is my body."

Edited to add that just because we, as humans, do not recognize ourself as being the continuity of God only means that we are finding existence outside of our own self.

A logical explanation of hell would be that just as heaven is a state of mind, hell is also a state of mind wherein we have knowledge of God but remain distant from God. It is because God is omnipresent that we can have knowledge of God and so if we have become aware of Gods presence in our life but fail to come to a full understanding of God (fail to ascend and obtain the mind of God) it can be said that we are made lukewarm and are in hell.

[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]

09-16-2002, 05:26 PM	#1
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	Omnipresence While reading Marcion's thread about the transcendent evil of Hell, it occured to me that even were we to allow the clear paradox created by omnibenevolence and Hell, we still could not call it logically conceivable. Omnipresence- the one often left out when the properties of God are listed- means that there can be no place where God is not. And even for those who try to postulate a Hell which is merely the absence of God, Hell becomes paradoxical. I think I have heard arguments which deny that God is omnipresent. Do we have any theists here who can expand on that?

09-17-2002, 07:19 PM	#10
Amos Guest Posts: n/a	Omnipresence has nothing to do with "being everywhere." Omnipresence requires presence first and omnipresence just means that everything is God to the same extent that it can be God or that it can be the continuity of God. Existence IS just as God IS and they are one and the same. Hence, "this is Buddha" or "this is my body." Edited to add that just because we, as humans, do not recognize ourself as being the continuity of God only means that we are finding existence outside of our own self. A logical explanation of hell would be that just as heaven is a state of mind, hell is also a state of mind wherein we have knowledge of God but remain distant from God. It is because God is omnipresent that we can have knowledge of God and so if we have become aware of Gods presence in our life but fail to come to a full understanding of God (fail to ascend and obtain the mind of God) it can be said that we are made lukewarm and are in hell. [ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-16-2002, 06:53 PM	#2
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Well, the attributes of omniscience and omnipotence can be seen as producing omnipresence without requiring that one actually be everywhere.

09-16-2002, 07:01 PM	#3
Keith Russell Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Overland Park, Kansas Posts: 1,336	Tron: I think omnipresence goes even further than 'being' everywhere. The law of identity, which states that a thing is what it is, pretty much means that either 'God' would not only be everywhere, 'God' would have to be everything, or not be omnipresent. If the Law of Identity is correct, and I believe that it is, then something could not be itself, and be 'God' at the same time. Since two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time, anywhere there was something other than 'God', there would be no 'God' there. Clearly, the idea of 'God' contradicts what we know to be true about reality. (And, what we know of reality also contradicts 'God'.) Keith.

09-17-2002, 12:27 PM	#4
Uni-Universe Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Earth/USA Posts: 28	What we know of reality contradicts what we believe to be the characteristics of God. Who really says that we are "right" at all about this concept called "God"? Who says that we know enough scientifically about reality etc. to make the assumption that it contradicts "God's" existence? Clearly we have so much more to learn about the universe. A place where the light of God doesn't touch (hell) would have to be a Void, a place without energy. Does such a place exist? If so, perhaps in another dimension? There are so many ideas or theories.

09-17-2002, 01:49 PM	#5
tronvillain Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 5,658	Keith, again the attributes of omnipotence and omniscience would seem to confer omnipresence without actually being everywhere or being everything.

09-17-2002, 05:18 PM	#7
Ron Singh Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Fremont, CA Posts: 163	HELl is how we relate to God. The less able we are to relate to God, the less of him we experience.

09-17-2002, 07:01 PM	#9
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	I wish that Albert Cipriani still posted here- I'd be interested in hearing his take on this. I tried to demonstrate to Albert that omnipresence also played hell ( ) with the concepts of free will and the immortal soul, much as does omniscience. If God is within us, every cell, every neuron- then how can 'we' be said to be separate from 'him'? I recently had a spirited discussion with a real live fundie, a woman I have known for many years, who somehow had never found out I am an unbeliever. I thought for a while I was simply going to have to tell her to leave my house- all the rational arguments I used either went over her head or were ignored, and she would keep right on preaching. Finally I asked her, "Where IS God?" She responded (eventually), "Everywhere!" So I pursued that, and asked if He was in our bodies, our thoughts- our souls. At that point she boggled- I guess she never thought of the fact that if God is omnipresent, where is left for her? When I asked if SHE was God- well, I wish I had had a video camera. The expression on her face was priceless!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.