Is God Non-Physical?

[Nakosis]

IMHO, God got "physical" in the person of Jesus Christ. If you have to warn ants about a holocaust, how could you do better than to become an ant and communicate with them (us)!

So can God only interact with the physical through human beings?

 

[Nakosis]

In Shia Islam God is not material, not physical, and has no body. And his essence can't be comprehended by human.

On the other hand, God talks about himself, and about his creatures. And He is different from his creatures. In that sense it seems that I can say that: the Shiites believe in a personal God.

How does God talk without physical form?

 

[1213]

...
OTOH, if God is physical, shouldn't we be able to detect/measure God?

Bible tells God is spirit and love. So, I would say he is not physical.

God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
John 4:24

He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8

We know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and he who remains in love remains in God, and God remains in him.
1 John 4:16

Bible tells also that God lives in disciples of Jesus.

But if the Spirit of him who raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
Romans 8:11

If God is in us, it shows in our actions.

 

[Nakosis]

Is God "non-physical"?



Advaita teaches that God is "all", so also both "non-physical" as well as "physical"


Good question, solves a lot.


Problem is, that we have not yet "defined" God, as far as I know (definition all agree on; hence comparing/debating gets problematic)
Advaita teaches that God is "beyond" definition

The wise express that the Truth is revealed in Silence (no mind, hence Science won't be able to reveal it IMO).

However, science does discover truths about the universe, doesn't it? Or science helps us discover these truths...

 

[Nakosis]

In the Baha'i writings this explanation has been offered;

"We find God only through the Intermediary of His Prophet. We see the Perfection of God in His Prophets. Time and space are physical things, God, the Creator is not in a 'place' as we conceive of place in physical terms. God is the Infinite Essence, the Creator. We cannot picture Him or His state; if we did, we would be His equals, not His Creatures. God is never flesh, but mirrored in the attributes of His Prophets, we see His Divine characteristics and perfections." Shoghi Effendi, Lights of Guidance, p. 504

Thus God to us is Spirit, but in saying that, it in no way defines the Essence of an Unknowable God.

Regards Tony

So God only interacts through other human beings?

 

[Nakosis]

No offense, but what the hell is God? Heck? Is your shoe detectable? If someone called your shoe God and you considered your shoe detectable, then how is God not detectable. Oh, but you must not think your shoe is God (or your shoe isn't detectable, where did it go?).

What is God? Refer to something detectable and you have a detectable God.

God for me is totally detectable. Is "what causes the next moment of experience" or "what animates experience" physical? It doesn't seem to be, but it is detectable, since your moments appear to be changing. "What does that" or is the ultimate abd immediate cause of that is what I consider God. What do you consider God?

Maybe someone says that God has a form. That is a different God from my God, since my God is what a Form-God depends on to process or exist.

If you have a Form-God, its bordered and what limits it and surrounds it, like the background for example which allows you to see the form, is greater than it.

Ok, we define God. Does that mean the man decides what God is? It seems that we are God's masters if we decide who God is.

 

[Nakosis]

The proper pronoun is She!

So god looks like a Man? Not Woman? Not Raven, Not a bear? So you have seen God to know?

I'm assuming you are non-male? Sure many tend to project our own image into God.

 

[Nakosis]

If God was material or even resembling a state of being such as ourselves, then it would be creation and not God. It would be a thing and not the source-of-things. It would be conditioned, and not Absolute.


Here is Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (pbuh) speaking about God:

"Praise be to God who is proof of His existence through His creation, of His being eternal through the newness of His creation, and through their mutual similarities of the fact that nothing is similar to Him. Senses cannot touch Him and curtains cannot veil Him, because of the difference between the Maker and the made, the Limiter and the limited and the Sustainer and the sustained.
He is One but not by the first in counting, is Creator but not through activity or labour, is Hearer but not by means of any physical organ, is Looker but not by a stretching of eyelids, is Witness but not by nearness, is Distinct but not by measurement of distance, is Manifest but not by seeing and is Hidden but not by subtlety (of body). He is Distinct from things because He overpowers them and exercises might over them, while things are distinct from Him because of their subjugation to Him and their turning towards Him.
He who describes Him limits Him. He who limits Him numbers Him. He who numbers Him rejects His eternity. He who said "how" sought a description for Him. He who said "where" bounded him. He is the Knower even though there be nothing to be known. He is the Sustainer even though there be nothing to be sustained. He is the Powerful even though there be nothing to be overpowered."


We also learn pretty quickly that applying any kind of personification literally (instead of symbolically) is also not describing God but rather creation.
God is not a Him, He, His, Her, She, Hers or anything else like that. "it" is the closest you get but even "it" presumes that God can be somehow distinguished.

So if we cannot identify God, doesn't this mean we really can't detect whether God interacts with the universe? If we only know God through the universe then don't we only need to know the universe, not God?

 

[Nakosis]

Man was created in the image of God, therefore God has an image. Immateriality has no image.

So a physical God. Seems you are a rebel when it comes to God's attributes. Most opt for a non-physical God. Do you believe God physically exists somewhere in the universe?

 

[rational experiences]

If science says God was invented from nothing, as every thing created IS.

Then he would be making false claims about God.

God is described by a human male storyteller as being O stone, that released its own stone spirits/gases into the spatial womb, impregnated space with its spirit, that grew and evolved by spatial cold empty pressure into God heavenly spirit.

That was attacked by the ANTI state, extra energy mass that was ejected as a mass ejection from the Sun.

Spiritual human taught by the eternal that is not in creation.

Science wants both God and also Jesus Christ and clouds and lightning to be the eternal for a resource. Which makes no sense whatsoever as science has to own a beginning and end formula to express what he also claims owns no beginning and no end.

So why don't you science males tell the truth for once?

You are just a human life the same as the rest of us.....born from 2 human beings, who have to exist first as human beings to be quantified to be human parents or humans. You cannot talk about a human not existing, for that is the exact description as a scientific analogy, does not exist.

Whatever age you are now...that length of time before equates to the point of sperm and an ovary conception of your owned self. Not your 2 parents, just your owned self. And you coerce and lie as that scientist human and always had.

Your claim is that 2 forms of variations to energy mass one being inferred to being larger than the other, collided and hence produced between 2 forces an outcome that says equals.

Eternal is not spoken of as being energy of any form.

Science says I want to think about a formula to invent energy as if energy does not exist.

So what is a formula about non existence of anything? No numbers, no letters either. Just some thoughts in a chemical affected brain mass, from incoming ancient science machine signals that directly inter relate with the male human self, seeing he designs were fake and artificial machines.

And are possessed historically from when you were DNA life removed/died mutated...hot radiation affected memories to conditions that support cold radiation in space, evolved and how ICE cooled Earth irradiated heated gases.

2 cold conditions that changed how life exists and owns memories and thinks.

Your term of energy from the infinite is not a reference to the meaning eternal.

Anyone would think that a lesser state removal of CHRIST as a meaning higher state via Jesus was how the eternal was formed.

Which then would be a status of affected human mind/male consciousness to say, seems he believes that a lower state and then the natural state invented the eternal. Makes no common sense whatsoever in science reasoning about God as a theory or Jesus Christ in science.

Science as the non occult self who thinks he superior in his thinking capabilities never believed in the eternal or spirit for a science reason that it owned no proof for science.

If such a place does exist, then you only know about it after your human bio life that you own human, dies and lays on the ground deceased as a human body, and decomposes. If your spiritual science claim that a decomposing human cellular body then goes into a higher state, then science would infer that to be a spirit, as a gas.

For science in its quota states...physical mass of energy is God the stone to convert with higher radiation mass...ufo status. Spirit is a gas as a higher form both historically as burning gases...historically as burning gases that cooled in spatial cooling states, as the spirit of a gas.

So then science also says to the spirit...meaning gas, once gas you were first a burning evil spirit.

Yet today for some sick in his head reasoning he makes that quote for a human being bio life and means it.

 

[Nakosis]

From my belief system, the Divine is unmanifest and manifest. From my belief system "God" exists in the beyond beyond which is not connected with the universe. God manifest as Avatar does interact.



There is no science that proves someone who claims to be God in human form is really God in human form.

So God interacts through other humans? But, there is no way to determine if God is interacting through another human?

 

[Nakosis]

I usually use it, really.

I have, but some folks get upset by it. Pronouns are difficult in English. Maybe we ought to get rid of them.

 

[Nakosis]

I think God has some physical characteristics, that being the earth and then when we start getting into the infinite universe God might start to look non-physical.

How does something non-physical look?

 

[Nakosis]

Bible tells God is spirit and love. So, I would say he is not physical.

God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
John 4:24

He who doesn't love doesn't know God, for God is love.
1 John 4:8

We know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and he who remains in love remains in God, and God remains in him.
1 John 4:16

Bible tells also that God lives in disciples of Jesus.

But if the Spirit of him who raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
Romans 8:11

If God is in us, it shows in our actions.

Does God then only interact with the universe through us?

 

[Nakosis]

Gods exist only in the immortal realms. When they decide to contact us in our mortal realm they use our head and senses alone. And heart. (body in general).

Would you know whether on not God is interacting through another human being?

 

[Jimmy]

I don't have a desire to.

How does something non-physical look?

see post #16

 

[Nakosis]

If science says God was invented from nothing, as every thing created IS.

Then he would be making false claims about God.

God is described by a human male storyteller as being O stone, that released its own stone spirits/gases into the spatial womb, impregnated space with its spirit, that grew and evolved by spatial cold empty pressure into God heavenly spirit.

That was attacked by the ANTI state, extra energy mass that was ejected as a mass ejection from the Sun.

Spiritual human taught by the eternal that is not in creation.

Science wants both God and also Jesus Christ and clouds and lightning to be the eternal for a resource. Which makes no sense whatsoever as science has to own a beginning and end formula to express what he also claims owns no beginning and no end.

So why don't you science males tell the truth for once?

You are just a human life the same as the rest of us.....born from 2 human beings, who have to exist first as human beings to be quantified to be human parents or humans. You cannot talk about a human not existing, for that is the exact description as a scientific analogy, does not exist.

Whatever age you are now...that length of time before equates to the point of sperm and an ovary conception of your owned self. Not your 2 parents, just your owned self. And you coerce and lie as that scientist human and always had.

Your claim is that 2 forms of variations to energy mass one being inferred to being larger than the other, collided and hence produced between 2 forces an outcome that says equals.

Eternal is not spoken of as being energy of any form.

Science says I want to think about a formula to invent energy as if energy does not exist.

So what is a formula about non existence of anything? No numbers, no letters either. Just some thoughts in a chemical affected brain mass, from incoming ancient science machine signals that directly inter relate with the male human self, seeing he designs were fake and artificial machines.

And are possessed historically from when you were DNA life removed/died mutated...hot radiation affected memories to conditions that support cold radiation in space, evolved and how ICE cooled Earth irradiated heated gases.

2 cold conditions that changed how life exists and owns memories and thinks.

Your term of energy from the infinite is not a reference to the meaning eternal.

Anyone would think that a lesser state removal of CHRIST as a meaning higher state via Jesus was how the eternal was formed.

Which then would be a status of affected human mind/male consciousness to say, seems he believes that a lower state and then the natural state invented the eternal. Makes no common sense whatsoever in science reasoning about God as a theory or Jesus Christ in science.

Science as the non occult self who thinks he superior in his thinking capabilities never believed in the eternal or spirit for a science reason that it owned no proof for science.

If such a place does exist, then you only know about it after your human bio life that you own human, dies and lays on the ground deceased as a human body, and decomposes. If your spiritual science claim that a decomposing human cellular body then goes into a higher state, then science would infer that to be a spirit, as a gas.

For science in its quota states...physical mass of energy is God the stone to convert with higher radiation mass...ufo status. Spirit is a gas as a higher form both historically as burning gases...historically as burning gases that cooled in spatial cooling states, as the spirit of a gas.

So then science also says to the spirit...meaning gas, once gas you were first a burning evil spirit.

Yet today for some sick in his head reasoning he makes that quote for a human being bio life and means it.

So we turn into gas after we die? Is this gas something that can be detected?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Any physical effect of a God would be interpreted naturalistically, and we would have no way of knowing it to be of a God.

I'm not at all certain that's true. To say that we would "interpret something naturalistically" would mean that we have some idea of the processes that led to the physical effect. In the absence of any notion of that at all, we would have to declare it at least a mystery.

If a salamder regrows his tail, we have a lot of knowledge about how this regeneration happens. If a human regrew a lost leg, we have none at all, and would certainly declare it a miracle, attributable to something at least resembling a "god."

 

[Nakosis]

see post #16

Is God just a feeling?

 

[Windwalker]

The only sentence in the OP which uses the third person singular possessive form of He" is: "His existence is non-physical and is distinct from His creations." So, which version are you most comfortable with or which do you think is most accurate?"

• "Your existence is non-physical and is distinct from Your creations."
• "Thy existence is non-physical and is distinct from Thy creations."
• "His existence is non-physical and is distinct from His creations."
• "Her existence is non-physical and is distinct from Her creations."
• "Its existence is non-physical and is distinct from Its creations."
• "Their existence is non-physical and is distinct from Their creations."

Try avoiding all of these, he, she or it. So the text should read, "God's existence is non-physical and is distinct from creation." Magically, there is no qualifier there to colorize how one should read "God" in the sentence as either a he, she, or it. It's left open.

As a footnote, I disagree with that statement itself which creates a division between God and creation. Notice, there is no him, her, or it, in saying that?