What if god is the universe

the culture of deference

I have been reading threads here about the need for a creator of the universe, but no need for a creators creator.

Would the religious be happy with accepting that god is the universe, not outside it / under it or hidig anywhere else.

JBnaglfar

the culture of deference wrote: »

I have been reading threads here about the need for a creator of the universe, but no need for a creators creator.

Would the religious be happy with accepting that god is the universe, not outside it / under it or hidig anywhere else.

I doubt it for the simple fact that it would go against religious doctrine. I think you are talking about pantheism, which is a very different belief compared to (poly)theism. If the universe was god, and we are all part of the universe, we are all part of god. *Opens potential can of worms (?) - If we are all part of god, how could any religion use concepts of the afterlife, judgement, reward/punishment to control followers?

ShooterSF

I would severely doubt it OP. The only types that would be persuadable are those that say things like "There most be something up there" etc. and I'd bet most of them keep that believe for one core reason, the afterlife. The reunion with those they have lost. That afterlife needs a supernatural place to exist outside the Universe...

robindch

the culture of deference wrote: »

Would the religious be happy with accepting that god is the universe, not outside it / under it or hidig anywhere else.

Good question, but I'd imagine they probably wouldn't be happy with it.

A lot of religious get quite caught up in the idea that their deity is "infinite" in many ways and you just can't fit the "infinite" into a finite universe. I think it would be pretty difficult too to sustain the immortality requirement in this universe, when people obviously die.

It would also raise questions about where the deity is and why he's staying so frightfully silent.

WeightierDisc

We were all sneezed from the nose of the great spagetti monster

nozzferrahhtoo

Actually in a sense I think the universe is god.

What I mean by this is related to an attribute of our species which I am actually quite proud of. It is the tendency of our species to personify aspects of our existence or ourselves.

We very often personify inanimate objects. Many of us have had discussions with things like our cars… promising them a top service if only they will start on this cold winter morning.

Sometimes we simply do it in order to help us conceptualize some problem or aspect of our day to day.

In historic religions we see that individual aspects of our universe and the human conditions were personified. We had a god of Thunder… but also a god of love. Many such gods were invented as personifications of very real things.

Out of such personification has come much in the form of art, literature and folklore.

It really is only a short step therefore to personify all of it together in one lump and call that “god”. Instead of personifying aspects of our universe and our existence, we do it with ALL of existence itself.

Again I think there potential for great art, literature and more in doing this. The problem obviously occurs in those that suddenly, for reasons that are still unknown to me despite years of asking, decide to believe those personifications real. It gets worse again when people then go on to claim they know what this entity wants, and that we should do as they say.

seamus

ShooterSF wrote: »

The reunion with those they have lost.

Tbh, I can accept the loss of loved ones, that they're gone and that's it. It hurts like fnck and it's a horrible experience, but it's something I can accept is going to happen and I know that I can get past.

Accepting my own mortality though is a whole other prospect...

Genghiz Cohen

Mark down Pantheist on the census.

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

It would also raise questions about where the deity is and why he's staying so frightfully silent.

I can understand why you think he's silent. Much like those who didn't believe Noah.

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,”

ShooterSF

seamus wrote: »

Tbh, I can accept the loss of loved ones, that they're gone and that's it. It hurts like fnck and it's a horrible experience, but it's something I can accept is going to happen and I know that I can get past.

Accepting my own mortality though is a whole other prospect...

For the most part I've gotten over my fear of death itself. When you look at it, when you're dead you won't even realise. I am terrified though of dying a slow death where I lose my capacity to do stuff and know it's never to return. The idea of a drawn out bed stricken terminal illness is sooo much scarier than actual death.

Here's to being hit by a bus

yawha

God is the universe?

What the hell does that even mean?

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

I can understand why you think he's silent. Much like those who didn't believe Noah.

Which Noah?

The one named Ut-Napishtim from the early Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, or the later, derivative one called Noah who showed up in the famous bible story?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/noah_com.htm

With Gilgamesh, Ut-Napishtim received the instructions from the chief deity, Ea, while the later story had Noah receiving an instruction from the chief deity, Jehovah. Other than switching the names, the stories are pretty much the same.

oldrnwisr

robindch wrote: »

Which Noah?

The one named Ut-Napishtim from the early Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, or the later, derivative one called Noah who showed up in the famous bible story?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/noah_com.htm

With Gilgamesh, Ut-Napishtim received the instructions from the chief deity, Ea, while the later story had Noah receiving an instruction from the chief deity, Jehovah. Other than switching the names, the stories are pretty much the same.

Even if there were a Noah, he would have had enough aliases to put any modern con-man to shame. There's Ziusudra, Manu, Deucalion, the Spider Grandmother, Lord Yu etc. etc.

It's not just the Gilgamesh and Noah stories where there are parallels. There are common themes in almost all flood myths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

kylith

Every time someone brings up Pantheism it reminds me of the talk about Silicon Heaven in Red Dwarf

Kryten: But Sir, don't you believe that God is in all things. Aren't you a Pantheist?
Lister: Yeah, but I'm not a fryingpantheist.

I, however, am a fryingpantheist. I believe that God is in my frying pan, delivering me the gift of yummy sausages, in it's infinite non-stickédness.

Seriously though, if you're going to worship something then The Universe is probably the most sensible option, after all it did create the earth and all that's on it. On the other hand it doesn't care if you go to mass and it never, ever answers prayers, so I wouldn't bother worshiping it if I were you; it won't notice.

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

Which Noah?

The one named Ut-Napishtim from the early Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, or the later, derivative one called Noah who showed up in the famous bible story?

Pick either, the principal is the same.

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

Pick either, the principal is the same.

You're not concerned that one of the founding stories of your religious texts was lifted from an earlier religion?

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

You're not concerned that one of the founding stories of your religious texts was lifted from an earlier religion?

I'm not concerned that Genesis was not the first thing ever written down, no. Nor am i concerned by anyones assumptions that anything was lifted from anywhere else.

So yeah, the principal remains the same in relation to people who think that God is seemingly absent.

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

Newaglish

Woah Woah Woah.

People actually think Noah's Ark was real?!

I figured that was up there with Adam & Eve insofar as people have accepted it's just a metaphor?

Dave!

Newaglish wrote: »

Woah Woah Woah.

Wrong, wrong, wrong!

Noah!


OP this just sounds like a pointless wordplay. How about we just say that the universe is the universe, god is a useless word that people plug in to fill gaps in our current knowledge, and let's move on.

sink

What if god is the universe?

We already have a word for that, it is 'universe'!

No point in defining the word 'god' to mean the same as another well used and perfectly understood term, because that's all your doing. I never understood the rational for pantheism as a concept, it just seems to be ridiculously contrived semantics.

pH

Newaglish wrote: »

Woah Woah Woah.

People actually think Noah's Ark was real?!

I figured that was up there with Adam & Eve insofar as people have accepted it's just a metaphor?

A metaphor for what?

wikipedia wrote:

Metaphor is the concept of understanding one thing in terms of another.

I'm serious. If you don't believe that the flood and the saving of the "2 of every kind" is literal, in that it never actually happened, then what is God's wilful destruction of pretty much the whole human race and all wildlife a metaphor for?

The Mad Hatter

If god is the universe then his authorised biography took some serious liberties.

liamw

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Actually in a sense I think the universe is god.

What I mean by this is related to an attribute of our species which I am actually quite proud of. It is the tendency of our species to personify aspects of our existence or ourselves.

We very often personify inanimate objects. Many of us have had discussions with things like our cars… promising them a top service if only they will start on this cold winter morning.

Sometimes we simply do it in order to help us conceptualize some problem or aspect of our day to day.

In historic religions we see that individual aspects of our universe and the human conditions were personified. We had a god of Thunder… but also a god of love. Many such gods were invented as personifications of very real things.

Out of such personification has come much in the form of art, literature and folklore.

It really is only a short step therefore to personify all of it together in one lump and call that “god”. Instead of personifying aspects of our universe and our existence, we do it with ALL of existence itself.

Again I think there potential for great art, literature and more in doing this. The problem obviously occurs in those that suddenly, for reasons that are still unknown to me despite years of asking, decide to believe those personifications real. It gets worse again when people then go on to claim they know what this entity wants, and that we should do as they say.

Don't call anthropomorphic tendancies "god" though. It just confuses the crap out of everything. That can be explained through evolutionary psychology, but you do touch on an interesting point. This tendency to anthromorphize everything is one of the primary reasons why people have always believed in deities, in my opinion.

Hyperactive agency detection coupled with a tendency to pattern match... explained excellently by Andy Thomson in Why We Believe in Gods.

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

I'm not concerned that Genesis was not the first thing ever written down, no. Nor am i concerned by anyones assumptions that anything was lifted from anywhere else.

Assumption? It's not an assumption -- it's a fairly universally-agreed fact concerning where the story of Noah came from. And that includes most historians, though news of this hasn't really been spread amongst the believer populations for obvious reasons.

Does the origin of the story not interest you?

Turtwig

the culture of deference wrote: »

I have been reading threads here about the need for a creator of the universe, but no need for a creators creator.

Would the religious be happy with accepting that god is the universe, not outside it / under it or hidig anywhere else.

You realise if that were to be true then we could just as easily call God 'The Force'.:D

JimiTime

robindch wrote: »

Assumption? It's not an assumption -- it's a fairly universally-agreed fact concerning where the story of Noah came from.

Yeah, FACT is a fairly abused term. Even using the link YOU provided.

Their texts are obviously linked in some way. Either:

*Genesis was copied from an earlier Babylonian story, or
*The Galgamesh myth was copied from an earlier Hebrew story, or
*Both were copied from a common source that predates them both.

No FACTS there.

And that includes most historians, though news of this hasn't really been spread amongst the believer populations for obvious reasons.

Its a Conspiracy!! Well i know about it, I can't really speak for 'believer populations'.

Does the origin of the story not interest you?

A little.

As I said though, it matters not to the point in relation to your comment about Gods supposed absenteeism. Scoffing and cynicism are not a new thing. Like Jesus said. God did not visit everyone there neither, but worked through a man

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

philologos

This is pantheism. If people wish to believe in pantheism that is their prerogative, but for Christians, Muslims and Jews it is incompatible with the idea of Creation for example.

himnextdoor

What if god is the universe

Then physics and religion could agree.

Before creation there was only God. At that time there were no materials available from which a universe could be created therefore the universe must be made from God.

If the Christian God exists, then He must have made the universe from Himself.

The question is though, how much of Himself did He need to use?

Perhaps He simply turned His entire self into the universe to see what it would feel like and is expecting that one day He will turn back into God at which point He might turn Himself into something else to see how that feels, and so on.

Or maybe the universe is just the equivalent of a discarded fingernail clipping that God forgot about around 13.7 billion years ago.

Either way, you and I are inconsequential with regard to the ultimate fate of the universe. The best we can hope for is to understand it a little better.

As far as Christians are concerned though, God is defined as that thing that science will never detect and since the universe is detectable, the universe cannot be God - either in part or in whole.

It is not possible for Christianity to change its view on this except through its complete destruction and reformation; the gold that has been collected on God's behalf could fall out of the wrong hands.

sionnach

Did anyone else hear the thread title played in their head to the tune of "What if god was one of us?"

cursai

sionnach wrote: »

Did anyone else hear the thread title played in their head to the tune of "What if god was one of us?"

I just hear the song (that i just made up) 'I believe that i dont believe' by I'veconvincedmyselfthati'm Wright.:rolleyes:

Turtwig

sionnach wrote: »

Did anyone else hear the thread title played in their head to the tune of "What if god was one of us?"

Yeah, glad to see I'm not the only one.:)

dead one

the culture of deference wrote: »

I have been reading threads here about the need for a creator of the universe, but no need for a creators creator.

Would the religious be happy with accepting that god is the universe, not outside it / under it or hidig anywhere else.

If universe were god, there would certainly be turmoil and your topic would not here.

Turtwig

dead one wrote: »

If universe were god, there would certainly be turmoil and your topic would not here.

And you know this how?

dead one

Malty_T wrote: »

And you know this how

vision,wisdom, knowledge also vision is art of seeing what is invisible to others.

robindch

dead one wrote: »

vision delusion is art of seeing what is invisible to others not there.

FYP.

Goduznt Xzst

JimiTime wrote: »

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,”

Nicely formatted

JimiTime wrote: »

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

Forgets to close the quotes

JimiTime wrote: »

Matt. 24:37-38: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. “For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

Doesn't bother formatting at all.

The "law of diminishing returns" in action folks.

dead one

robindch wrote: »

vision delusion is art of seeing what is invisible to others not there.

That is irony my friend, based on what we now know from science, materialism is the irrational and illogical conclusion.

Turtwig

dead one wrote: »

vision,wisdom, knowledge also vision is art of seeing what is invisible to others.

Do you have this actually vision, or do you just believe you have it?

robindch

dead one wrote: »

Crumbs, muslims using christian propaganda.

What is the world coming to!

sensibleken

Most people of the abrahamic traditions would not agree. But this idea is quite common in others. Taoism argues along similar lines and a good few branches of paganism argue it outright.

After all the universe makes the rules, you respect nature or it punishes you etc. They dont even all translate directly into worship but rather into respect.

Zombrex

dead one wrote: »

That is irony my friend, based on what we now know from science, materialism is the irrational and illogical conclusion.

What we see in God's world agrees with what we read in God's word so long as we simply change anything that we see when it doesn't :rolleyes:

robindch

Wicknight wrote: »

What we see in God's world agrees with what we read in God's word so long as we simply change anything that we see when it doesn't

And there's evidence in the fossil record of religious leaders actually telling their believers to change it (if it, er, weren't already made up, you couldn't make up this stuff...!) Anyhow, here's (diploma-mill-doctor) Ken Ham telling people to replace "dragon" with "dinosaur" so that the bible magically matches with reality. Ssearch for "Are Dinosaurs Mentioned in Ancient Literature?", down near the end of the page:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1999/11/05/dinosaurs-and-the-bible

There isn't a facepalm big enough.

sensibleken

robindch wrote: »

And there's evidence in the fossil record of religious leaders actually telling their believers to change it (if it, er, weren't already made up, you couldn't make up this stuff...!) Anyhow, here's (diploma-mill-doctor) Ken Ham telling people to replace "dragon" with "dinosaur" so that the bible magically matches with reality. Ssearch for "Are Dinosaurs Mentioned in Ancient Literature?", down near the end of the page:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1999/11/05/dinosaurs-and-the-bible

There isn't a facepalm big enough.

Not only that but I just learned that God created everyone vegetarian. wahahahaha! You're all going to hell!

cosmicfart

God, in a word, has always meant the reason for our existence, believing god is the universe is just like saying we are nourished by the earth, and actually makes a hell of a lot more sense than most religions that try to expand and say humans are really that important in the bigger picture of the universe. we need some real alien obductions documented and we might be going places, like Mars

CiaranMT

OP, Google 'God's Debris', a short book by the Dilbert cartoonist. He touches on this concept, you can d-load it for free as a pdf.

dead one

robindch wrote: »

Crumbs, muslims using christian propaganda.

What is the world coming to!

There is no propaganda my friend. Don't be smart. It honesty on my part that i uploaded an image from direct site. I could also use indirect source so that you could not see propaganda. Now same question.
Why are geniuses usually arrogant about their intelligence?

check this

BIBLE: RE : no other gods (what if god is the universe)
(One of the Commandments) "You shall not have no other gods before me."

Exodus 20:3

=========================================================

Qur'an: RE : no other gods (what if god is the universe)
You shall worship GOD alone - do not associate anything with Him.....

I know that some of my friends do like to see every thing from their set propaganda prism but I think it is high time to change those tinted glasses:eek:

Wicknight wrote:

What we see in God's world agrees with what we read in God's word so long as we simply change anything that we see when it doesn't

Have you ever tried to read Quran . I believe only that part of bible which match with Quran. I don't have any problem to call it God's word.

Malty_T wrote:

Do you have this actually vision, or do you just believe you have it?

I don't have this actually vision, i have told it on base of wisdom.

himnextdoor

dead one wrote: »

[Qur'an: RE : no other gods (what if god is the universe)
You shall worship GOD alone - do not associate anything with Him.....

And yet ones associates.

Mellor

What is the point here?


Pantheism is the believe that the universe and God are one, but that refers to "their" idea of god, they don't believe in a creator. What people are doing here is confusing that idea with the more common christian (of muslim, or jewish) God. It'd totally against the idea of pantheism and makes no sense.

In pantheism, the idea of god is just a way to relate to the universe, not to personify the universe

b318isp

Mellor wrote: »

In pantheism, the idea of god is just a way to relate to the universe, not to personify the universe

Right.

Mellor wrote: »

Pantheism is the believe that the universe and God are one, but that refers to "their" idea of god, they don't believe in a creator. What people are doing here is confusing that idea with the more common christian (of muslim, or jewish) God. It'd totally against the idea of pantheism and makes no sense.

I've juggled your paragraphs around as I think your explanation can be seen to make sense.

Newaglish

pH wrote: »

A metaphor for what?



I'm serious. If you don't believe that the flood and the saving of the "2 of every kind" is literal, in that it never actually happened, then what is God's wilful destruction of pretty much the whole human race and all wildlife a metaphor for?

Firstly, many thanks for explaining what a metaphor is.

Secondly, I must confess, I haven't kept up to date on the dilution of Christianity over the years. I figured all of those stories from the Old Testament (Adam & Eve, Noah's Ark etc.) were now agreed to be metaphors. I can't say for what but I didn't think anyone really believed those were literally true. I'd be surprised if people really thought there was some massive boat with two of every animal, but I guess I shouldn't be!

yawha

Mellor wrote: »

In pantheism, the idea of god is just a way to relate to the universe

What does that mean?