How can Something Omnipresent have a Form?

reply to post by jhill76


So what you say is almost like the movie Inception.

God created Father.
So Father is a piece of creation that is the ruler of all creation because He is part of the Almighty God. Just like Father takes the credit for God to those in the bubble, Jesus also takes credit for us inside the bubble that's inside the bubble.

So if Father was created from God, did Father create Jesus, or did God create Jesus? How many forms does God take?

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
reply to post by jhill76

 

So what you say is almost like the movie Inception.

God created Father.
So Father is a piece of creation that is the ruler of all creation because He is part of the Almighty God. Just like Father takes the credit for God to those in the bubble, Jesus also takes credit for us inside the bubble that's inside the bubble.

So if Father was created from God, did Father create Jesus, or did God create Jesus? How many forms does God take?

Brother and Mother also sit outside of creation. God created Brother. Father does not create, as he is just the voice/figure of God. God is the one whom creates.

For man, God does not have a figure. But, when man sheds the body and returns home, he will see Father.

Father takes many forms while here as well. He may be a beggar, he may pose as a soldier to interact etc.

Originally posted by GrimpachiThis is something that puzzles me. In Exodus 33:18–23 God says unambiguously that He has a face, a hand and a back. This distinctly means there is form and a body yet he is supposed to be omnipresent. To me this is a pretty big issue because man is supposed to have been created in his image.

Man is merely made in God's image and likeness and not with his powers. Just like a statue made in your image and likeness, but it doesn't have any attributes which we can call human.

God is spirit. Man is flesh and blood. We do not have the same spiritual substance as God.

reply to post by DelayedChristmas

How many forms does God take?

There is only one "god" form, as a generic type that a person could be.
There are multiple persons who have that "form", which I would take as meaning a modality of existence, including things like being eternal.

reply to post by Grimpachi


To answer the question, "How can Something Omnipresent have a Form?" - The answer would be, that it is able to change its form. It is a shape-shifter.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

Again, we have a description of God before the universe existed. The Word is Jesus, who clearly did not have a physical form until He took one to be born of Mary.

Yes he did have a physical form before Mary. He showed himself many times to people, pre-human incarnation. He was with Abraham in Genesis 18, he was with Moses at Mt. Sinai/Horeb (Exodus 33:19-23), before Manoah and his wife, the parents of Samson (Judges 13), before Joshua in Joshua 5. Isaiah saw him sitting on his throne in Isaiah 6.

The reason he came as a man born of Mary was for salvation's sake and because the Israelites asked him to stop speaking and showing himself as he did at Mt. Sinai and Horeb because he scared them nearly to death and they made him promise to not show himself like that lest they die (Deut. 18:15-16).

John the Baptist was like Elijah, but Joshua (Yahshua) was like Moses, a forshadowing of Yahshua the Anointed One..

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

pre-human incarnation

That, I think, would be a contradiction in terms.
Sarx is the Greek work for Flesh.
It is also the word for being human.
The only place in the New Testament that mentions an existence of the preincarnate Jesus in the world is in 1 Corinthians 10:4, where it says that the rock that followed the Israelites in the wilderness was Jesus.
So when Moses was talking to the rock, he was, without understanding what he was doing, praying to Jesus.
So he was not in human or "incarnate" form, but was present in a metaphorical sort of way.

So from what I have gathered he never had a form at least not a solid physical one and though some described him with human characteristics such as feet, or back that does not mean he looks human or that when it's said man was made in his image they were not talking about the physical form.

Honestly that makes more sense than it being the other way around and puts at ease the quagmire of omnipresence. I don't see how it could be any other way now.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Honestly that makes more sense . . .

I think that is how you run into a problem, trying to make sense of it.
What I think that the ancient Bible writers thought was that God or divine beings look just like people but better or "glorious", but you could not like take a sword to one and cut it open and find flesh and blood.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Well I don't know any atheist that even try's to make sense of the bible most just dismiss it as fairy tales. At least I am trying to see if it can hold up to scrutiny so I ask questions on parts that are seemingly lacking.

I am trying to get clarification on certain issues in hopes of gaining a better understanding.

Originally posted by Grimpachi


This is something that puzzles me. In Exodus 33:18–23 God says unambiguously that He has a face, a hand and a back. This distinctly means there is form and a body yet he is supposed to be omnipresent. To me this is a pretty big issue because man is supposed to have been created in his image.

It would be one thing if the bible claimed the universe was god’s body or that god was purely spiritual but it definitely says he has form. I am trying to gain some insight on this and have done some searches looked through couple sites and one even said.
The only way to understand this passage from Exodus without making a mockery of God’s word is to agree that God has a shape and a body!

It seemed like a site meant to instruct others on how to answer questions like that however it never really answered the question it seemed to dodge the issue. I would like to know how do those of faith reconcile this or do you even try? If you have an idea how that is supposed to work I would like to know. Please no YouTube videos they always seem to be doing mental gymnastics. If you can explain it plainly that would be great.

I spoke to my Priest and this is the teaching he gave me, before I share, I have to thank you for bringing to our attention such a wonderful message.

The understanding we have of this is there is a spiritual message within this literal story. The hand represents the way something works, the face represents "the understanding," and the "back parts" represents the fact that you cannot see what "the plan is" and you can't see the face meaning you can't see "the understanding" but you see the testimony/aftermath/results. The timeless message God is teaching us here is is that the glorious plan of God was purposely hid away from Moses and the only thing Moses would see would be the aftermath of what God had planned. For example Moses came to the Red Sea and didn't know what God had planned but only after was it revealed.

If you read further in Exodus 34v30 Moses had to put a veil on his face because "it shone" after he came down after his encounter with God, and people were afraid. The same happened with Jesus when he went up into the mountain and his diciplies were afraid. Just as when Jesus brought the beautiful understanding of God, people feared him as well. Even the understandings I've posted on this forum scarred people. David also was chosen by god because of his "beautiful countenance," again his "understanding" was beautiful because he was always found feeding spiritually the children of God. 1stSam16v12

This is why the Sun represents God and the Moon represents his testimony because we were to look into the Sun it would blind us, the understanding of God is just too far beyond us but the Moon is a softer light that shines in the dark times of life that we can see the glory of God in ways we can aknowledge/understand and that testimony becomes hope for others (This is also why the women in Rev12 was on the moon and not the sun.)

Moses like us today will never be able to fully see the plan that God has and even if we were told probably couldn't accept/understand it. Even if we serve God, we will not understand what he has planned for us anymore than Moses did, no man will be given the full plan of God. Things happen in the moment and we don't see the glory of God in it until after. And God does this for good reason because many times he likes to solve the impossible so we can't credit it to chance but his divine intervention and power.

Originally posted by jhill76

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.

Rev. 22:3-4

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.

Exodus 33:18-20

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.”

Neither of those verses even deal with a figure called "Father" that is some sort of Godly avatar.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

No. You are now limiting God by him needing to be "freed up".

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.
As soon as you say, "No, I am not God", then you just limited God.

How does me not being God limit God? It sounds cool, but there's zero logic to it. Saying God can only be in one place at a time is a limitation.

People are distinct as "persons" one from another, that is what makes them persons.
The person, God, is distinct from me, that is what makes Him a person.

Circular reasoning, you start with God being a person then use His being a person as proof He is a person.

God is limited.

God does not need freeing up, God can be all places, at all moments of time, doing all things at once.

Let me put it this way, "why would God want to be everywhere?"

edit on 31-8-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

It has nothing to do with Him wanting anything, it's His nature. It's like asking why you wanted to be born with human DNA. Want has nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

. . . there doesn't seem to be any kind of consensus on the matter unless it is a taboo subject.

What is taboo is the biblical concept of the universe:
a flat disk surrounded by an ocean covered by a dome with torches attached.

Where is that the Biblical concept of the Universe?

Isa 40:22
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

So it's clear the Earth is round from that verse.

Job 26:7
He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

So now we see the Bible describes a "circle" in space.

The belief that the Earth was a flat square is not found in the bible. Galileo himself said the Bible does not teach the Earth being flat and the center of the universe, instead he said the Bible supported heliocentrism. Catholics demanded a flat Earth, not the Bible.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I find myself agreeing with OR on this even with the passages that WW gave. I think that makes more sense than an actual figure.


Frankly I am a bit surprised at all the varying opinions I had thought that this would have been established doctrine for most. I have a feeling that when it comes to matters of defining god that it may be a bit of a taboo subject in many circles.

Not having a established form certainly helps with the issue of omnipresence.

It's very established, but this is ATS where people with fringe beliefs gather, so it's not surprising you get a lot of fringe beliefs.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Again, we have a description of God before the universe existed. The Word is Jesus, who clearly did not have a physical form until He took one to be born of Mary.

Yes he did have a physical form before Mary. He showed himself many times to people, pre-human incarnation. He was with Abraham in Genesis 18, he was with Moses at Mt. Sinai/Horeb (Exodus 33:19-23), before Manoah and his wife, the parents of Samson (Judges 13), before Joshua in Joshua 5. Isaiah saw him sitting on his throne in Isaiah 6.

The reason he came as a man born of Mary was for salvation's sake and because the Israelites asked him to stop speaking and showing himself as he did at Mt. Sinai and Horeb because he scared them nearly to death and they made him promise to not show himself like that lest they die (Deut. 18:15-16).

John the Baptist was like Elijah, but Joshua (Yahshua) was like Moses, a forshadowing of Yahshua the Anointed One..

That's great, now show me that it was Jesus in those verses you listed, since it's very clear it was not Jesus.
Jhn 1:14
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Jesus did not become flesh until He was born of Mary.

Originally posted by Grimpachi

So from what I have gathered he never had a form at least not a solid physical one and though some described him with human characteristics such as feet, or back that does not mean he looks human or that when it's said man was made in his image they were not talking about the physical form.

Honestly that makes more sense than it being the other way around and puts at ease the quagmire of omnipresence. I don't see how it could be any other way now.

Glad I could help. The Bible is pretty clear on the subject once you look at the Bible as a full complete book instead of as a single verse, and then you think of how a writer would describe the indescribable.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

The belief that the Earth was a flat square is not found in the bible.

I didn't say anything about a square.
A disc is a circle, a circle is not a sphere.
Is Galileo a theologian?

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

The Bible is pretty clear on the subject once you look at the Bible as a full complete book instead of as a single verse . . .

Playing "Mix and Match" with bits of text like a puzzle results in a muddled mess.
There is no magic code in the Bible to solve.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

How does me not being God limit God?

I don't know. Do you think that you are God?
If you think that you are, then the argument will not work with you.

Saying God can only be in one place at a time is a limitation.

I didn't say that.

Circular reasoning, you start with God being a person then use His being a person as proof He is a person.

Are you a person? Do you think that God is a person?
How about me, do you think that I am a person? Are you me, and am I you? Are we limited by not being able to be someone else? I think so. Being limited is a good thing, especially if I want to be me rather than someone else being me.