Is God a man?

[Coder]

... I simply stated that whatever He is, He is not a carbon based life form.

Are we merely a carbon-based life form? If we believe that all existence and life is in the mind of God (so to speak), what does that mean about us? (food for thought)

 

[jimb]

Similarly, when I was in school and beyond, I believed everything scientists said about the theory of evolution. It was only some years later when I studied the Bible in as much depth as possible that I seriously questioned the theory of evolution as taught by scientists.

Then clearly you don't understand the theory of evolution. Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances.

 

[jimb]

A very important question.
A human is a bundle of molecules whose capabilities degenerate with time.
At some point of time, the human species will cease to exist as it has happened with other species of animals or vegetation.
Just one of the random things that happen in the universe.

Thanks for your opinion (which is all that it is). BTW, simply because a few species no longer exist (for a variety of reasons) does not mean that the human species will cease to exist.

 

[jimb]

That is not going to end the question. If God is a carbon-based life form, then from where carbon and other elements which compose God came about? Is God too a result of some ancient asexual reproduction like in case of humans? Humans are cousins to Chimps and Apes. Who are the cousins to God?

God is eternal. He always has been and always will be. He is outside of time.

However, at one point in time, God was born as a human and became the Messiah who has saved humanity from all sins (if He is accepted as the Savior).

 

[jimb]

I never said I knew nothing about God. I simply stated that whatever he is, he is not a carbon based life form.

This makes zero sense. If you know nothing about God, how do you know that he is not a carbon-based life form?

As I said in the previous message, at one point in time, God was born as a human (a carbon-based life form).

 

[YoursTrue]

Then clearly you don't understand the theory of evolution. Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances.

I understand it. Do I believe it? No, I do not. By the way, do you understand Judaism and why many do not believe Jesus is the Messiah?

 

[YoursTrue]

This makes zero sense. If you know nothing about God, how do you know that he is not a carbon-based life form?

As I said in the previous message, at one point in time, God was born as a human (a carbon-based life form).

So do you understand how life gets into carbon?

 

[YoursTrue]

God is eternal. He always has been and always will be. He is outside of time.

However, at one point in time, God was born as a human and became the Messiah who has saved humanity from all sins (if He is accepted as the Savior).

Since you believe that Jesus is God,1/3 of the godhead, was that 1/3 of the godhead always in a human body while 2/3 were somewhere else?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

If you know nothing about God,

This is the second time you have misunderstood me. I never said I knew nothing about God. That means the opposite of what you said of me. My assumption is that you are just reading very quickly. I know when I do that, I sometimes misunderstand what people say, even when they are very clear.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Are we merely a carbon-based life form? If we believe that all existence and life is in the mind of God (so to speak), what does that mean about us? (food for thought)

Your word "merely" has a connotation of not being as good. I see the universe as being created by God, who said, "It is good."

 

[Coder]

Hi Indigo,

Your word "merely" has a connotation of not being as good.

The question implied the goodness in contrast to "merely". Perhaps, I was thinking somewhat in terms of your aforementioned science perspective. I do see your point, and we don't disagree, however, I think that we can consider further:

I see the universe as being created by God, who said, "It is good."

I don't believe that God creates and then leaves creation on its own. I doubt that view (nor am I assuming that you have that belief). I have mentioned in several posts, the concept of man in the image of God and what physical matter really is. An attempt to put into words: I believe that when we perceive and experience physical matter, we are experiencing what is in God's mind and we who experience it are also God's conception in time and space which itself is in His mind. "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you."

 

[Aupmanyav]

Thanks for your opinion (which is all that it is). BTW, simply because a few species no longer exist (for a variety of reasons) does not mean that the human species will cease to exist.

Thanks for your opinion (which is all that it is).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Thanks for your opinion (which is all that it is). BTW, simply because a few species no longer exist (for a variety of reasons) does not mean that the human species will cease to exist.

Thanks for your opinion (which is all that it is).
Yeah, microbes have existed for 3.7 billion years.

 

[Aupmanyav]

God is eternal. He always has been and always will be. He is outside of time.
However, at one point in time, God was born as a human and became the Messiah who has saved humanity from all sins (if He is accepted as the Savior).

What constitutes me is also eternal, outside of time.
No, he saved only those who accepted him as the anointed son of God. Not all humanity, he has not saved Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Daoists, Confucianists, Shinto, Pagans, etc.
In theistic Hinduism, it is our own actions which save or destroy us - not any God or Goddess.
In atheistic Hinduism like mine, we have done away with all this 'saving' clap-trap.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Please define specifically the difference between scientism and science.

Dogma.

One basic condition of Methodological Naturalism is it can only falsify theories and hypothesis based on physical evidence, and cannot deal with the question of the existence of Gods, or support for the atheist or theist beliefs.

That doesn't mean that physical evidence can't be misinterpreted.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Similarly, when I was in school and beyond, I believed everything scientists said about the theory of evolution. It was only some years later when I studied the Bible in as much depth as possible that I seriously questioned the theory of evolution as taught by scientists.

I see. Science and theology are both imperfect efforts of mankind and both are often wrongly held as dogmatic by ideologues. The same as anything else really. The history of science and theology being viewed as contradictory, in my opinion, comes primarily from the ideological misunderstanding that both of them have "the answers to life, the universe and everything."

 

[shunyadragon]

Dogma.



That doesn't mean that physical evidence can't be misinterpreted.

Intentional ignorance of science based on an ancient religious agenda.

 

[I Am Hugh]

If you study the Bible sin is disobeying God.

Missing the mark set by God.

Disobeying God means disobeying the 10 commandments God gave to us to Follow.

No. The 10 commandments were given specifically to ancient Israel under a covenant which was broken. It no longer applies to anyone, although it is a good idea to use it as a rule of thumb, it is no longer under law and never was to anyone outside of Israel. Not only that but it didn't exist for a long time. All of the evil that existed to such an extent that Enoch asked God to take his life couldn't have sinned because there was no Law or Commandments until much later.

Those who do not follow them will not be saved.

Wrong.

Jesus was sent in the likeness of sinful man. Romans 8:2

Sorry, but that doesn't even make sense to me. How do you get that out of Romans 8:2 or anywhere in the Bible. It's difficult to argue in that it is so ambiguous, but at the same time so easy to argue with in that it is so obviously not true in any sense that I can see. To say sin is flesh isn't correct for reasons I've stated. Satan and the demons have sinned, they aren't flesh, Adam was flesh before he sinned, Jesus didn't sin he took the sin of man. Man is currently under sin but that will be taken away. It already has been but not in effect. The Bible teaches resurrection which is flesh without sin. Man is sinful and Jesus was a man, but he was without sin, he foreshadowed being flesh without sin. Jesus was in the likeness of Adam prior to Adam's sin, not after it.

For the law of the Spirit in Christ hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not in that it was weak through the flesh. God sending is own SON in the likeness of sinful man, and for sin. condemned sin in flesh.

Sin in flesh, not flesh itself. You seem to be using sin and flesh as synonymous. There is a contrast between the spiritually motivated and the materially motivated, or fleshly and spiritually, but they are not absolute. The spiritual isn't necessarily without sin and the flesh isn't necessarily sinful. Eating is a fleshly or material concern but it isn't sinful.

Those who follow God and obey God are no longer a slave to sin.

But they are still sinners, they are still under inherited sin, until death. (Romans 6:7) Even with Jesus we aren't acquitted, or freed from sin until we die.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Intentional ignorance of science based on an ancient religious agenda.

Have it tattooed on your forehead. It doesn't work, though, for someone who isn't an ideologue.

 

[shunyadragon]

Have it tattooed on your forehead. It doesn't work, though, for someone who isn't an ideologue.

Your dogs are 2000 years old.