It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Grimpachi
What does "being present" mean?
I think you are referring to Omniscience: Universal or Complete knowledge I was referring to om•ni•pres•ent (of God) present everywhere at the same time.
It means doing something somewhere.
Why would God be somewhere doing nothing?
God can do something somewhere that the affects last a long time or forever, freeing Him up to do something somewhere else.
en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Originally posted by jhill76
Originally posted by Grimpachi
Okay I must not be explaining this well because it all comes full circle back to something having form yet being omnipresent. Being physically present somewhere yet being everywhere simply does not make a bit of sense to me. Like I said I am tired so I will give this another shot after some sleep.
Maybe then I can phrase my question a little bit better.
When the Bible was written, and when anyone speaks of God, they are referring to Father. No one here or above except a select few can go outside of creation and interact with God, they can only interact with Father. So, Father has a form. Thus the confusion. Father is a piece of God, to have interaction with all in a form, that all can see and hear.
Sorry but that is lost on me. It just doesn't compute.
However when you say he has form do you mean a physical form?
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by jhill76
No, God does not have a physical form. He is able to assume one if He desires, but His nature does not include a physical form.
Originally posted by jhill76
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by jhill76
No, God does not have a physical form. He is able to assume one if He desires, but His nature does not include a physical form.
Father does have a physical form, God does not. Father is the figurehead of God above. Father is apart of God.
No. Father does not. Please show me what verses you use to come to this ridiculous conclusion. Did Father simply not exist before the universe was created?
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
No. Father does not. Please show me what verses you use to come to this ridiculous conclusion. Did Father simply not exist before the universe was created?
Correct, there was only God. God created Father to be the image of God to all. Just as he created his spirits to perform different tasks inside of creation. This is common knowledge to those in the know here and above.edit on 31-8-2013 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)
So you have zero verses to support your claim? That's fine, you invalidate your claim by specifically stating "Father" is apart from God, and is not God, therefore even if you're right, that has nothing to do with God having a physical body.
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
So you have zero verses to support your claim? That's fine, you invalidate your claim by specifically stating "Father" is apart from God, and is not God, therefore even if you're right, that has nothing to do with God having a physical body.
This is not a claim, but what is. In the end, you will understand, as this information is not needed for the test of life for man here. It does, as Father is the physical/spiritual portion of God. Father is God inside of creation. Outside of creation, he is a piece of God, but not God in totality.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
So you have zero verses to support your claim? That's fine, you invalidate your claim by specifically stating "Father" is apart from God, and is not God, therefore even if you're right, that has nothing to do with God having a physical body.
This is not a claim, but what is. In the end, you will understand, as this information is not needed for the test of life for man here. It does, as Father is the physical/spiritual portion of God. Father is God inside of creation. Outside of creation, he is a piece of God, but not God in totality.
It's a claim with zero evidence to support it. What verses support it? In the interest of not derailing this thread it's my last response to this.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Originally posted by jhill76
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
No. Father does not. Please show me what verses you use to come to this ridiculous conclusion. Did Father simply not exist before the universe was created?
Correct, there was only God. God created Father to be the image of God to all. Just as he created his spirits to perform different tasks inside of creation. This is common knowledge to those in the know here and above.edit on 31-8-2013 by jhill76 because: (no reason given)
So you have zero verses to support your claim? That's fine, you invalidate your claim by specifically stating "Father" is apart from God, and is not God, therefore even if you're right, that has nothing to do with God having a physical body.
No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads.
18 Then Moses said, “Now show me your glory.”
19 And the Lord said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”
Why is it that what you are calling "limiting" God a bad thing? Just by saying that God is a distinct person, you are limiting God. Unless you want to say that you are God, and God is you, or that there is no "you", since all is one.
No. You are now limiting God by him needing to be "freed up".
Let me put it this way, "why would God want to be everywhere?"
God does not need freeing up, God can be all places, at all moments of time, doing all things at once.
Depends.
. . . I had thought that this would have been established doctrine for most.
. . . there doesn't seem to be any kind of consensus on the matter unless it is a taboo subject.
41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. the manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, "for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator".
42 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, imagebound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God --"the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable"-- with our human representations. Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God.
43 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that "between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude"; and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."
356 of all visible creatures only man is "able to know and love his creator". He is "the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake", and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life. It was for this end that he was created, and this is the fundamental reason for his dignity:
What made you establish man in so great a dignity? Certainly the incalculable love by which you have looked on your creature in yourself! You are taken with love for her; for by love indeed you created her, by love you have given her a being capable of tasting your eternal Good.
357 Being in the image of God the human individual possesses the dignity of a person, who is not just something, but someone. He is capable of self-knowledge, of self-possession and of freely giving himself and entering into communion with other persons. and he is called by grace to a covenant with his Creator, to offer him a response of faith and love that no other creature can give in his stead.
It looks like, to me, a statement, in a roundabout way, that it cannot be explained.
Perhaps this is a clear, "establishment" answer to your question . . .