When I was a kid, I used to worry about #2 & 3 all the time. It must be tough being God, & having everyone using your name to justify their bad behavior. I personally wouldn't care for multiples; I have enough problems trying to toe the line w/just the One.

It would be awful to imagine this all powerful being all alone and quite cool if it actually manifested here on Earth...

The cliché "lonely at the top" had to originate somewhere, eh? But on the assumption there actually is an all powerful being, loneliness would not be a factor if you're omnipotent. Human emotions wouldn't apply, otherwise it would not be a 'god'.

I did enjoy the prospect of #7. I bet you could get a ton of cash for that on eBay.

Hi Mark,

I don't see that omnipotence necessarily excludes feeling lonely; maybe there are divine emotions too, not solely human ones..?

Well, I'll take these on one or two at a time from my viewpoint as a modern Christian follower. No offense taken, none intended.

1. Christians believe that there is only one God, the God of the Bible, of Moses and Abraham. God takes three forms: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Vastly oversimplified (the way I like it!) these three manifestations can be seen to represent the Heavenly ideal, the Earthly reality, and the promise (and the deliverance of that promise) of true reconciliation between God and his creation.

2. This and several of the questions reveal a common error (again, no offense intended): ascribing human / earthly drives & motivations to God. Yes, the Bible says we were made in His image, so perhaps it is not entirely unreasonable to do so. But - we are not omnipotent or omniscient, so I think it is also reasonable to say that God does not need our pity for some imagined loneliness or other human problems. Christians are engaged in an effort to do God's will and bring themselves closer to God; He is with us always so the question becomes, how can we become aware of His presence, and how can we help others to be aware of His presence? My personal take is that by doing God's will we help bring about the kingdom of God (a forever time of peace and love for all in the revealed radiance of His love) and we will all come to know him. It is frequently said (not by me) that such and such an activity or thought "hurts" Jesus or God. I don't think we can hurt him any more than he would hurt us as a loving Father. Rather, we harm the bringing about of his kingdom and delay it with our treachery and sin. We are His hands, doing His work and the sooner we remember that the sooner we will all be able to approach Paradise.

None of these answers is intended to imply theological certitude. For instance, it would take me hours and hours to find Scripture passages to back these up, and doubtless it would take minutes for someone with enough Bible knowledge who disagrees with me to tear them down. These are my thoughts and understanding arrived at through years of paying close (but not perfect) attention in church. YMMV.

HI Brian,

Sorry mate but I'm confused now. I can't see how your response #1 to my Q#1 is on subject.

Similarly, your #2 assumes i feel pity, but I don't, surely every living being appreciates company. All living things on Earth do and we humans are said to be made in his/her image. Wouldn't that also include his/hers emotional makeup?

This is a pointless, rambling discussion I didn't pay attention to, but that Jack Miles book linked on this post is a good one. Pick it up if you're at all religious or interested in theological questions.

That is all.

AB, sorry to have confused you. As for #1, You asked a question, I told you what I believe. Others believe differently - hopefully they'll pipe up.

As for #2, I took up your objection in my response - hopefully in a respectful way. Again, sorry if I was confusing. Maybe I'm communicating poorly. I'll let others who care to join in perhaps try to clarify.

Bob: Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful contribution to this conversation; it is consistent with your other comments to this site.

Brian: Thanks for trying, it's not an easy subject.

Dude, I'm not the one writing about if and what God craps. I hope you didn't mean this piece seriously, but I don't see it listed under "satire."

That is all.

Bob: Please re-read the headline. Then re-read the final paragraph. Er, you did actually read this, right? I am completely serious; are you?

You know you wrote "That is all" at the end of your previous comment. Where is that from?

Most sincerity is not taken seriously these days, Alienboy... be it about American Idol or God. Everything gets skewered.

Hi Mark: As a former publicist, I'm as guilty as anybody of having used spin, and still do when necessary. However, I see it as a Plan B type approach and prefer to keep things simple (KISS, remember) whenever possible. The article is sincere - by intelligent design, lol.

All genuine comments on the original post will be answered whenever possible, promise.

Alienboy, I did read it and I cannot believe a normally functioning adult human being would asks questions involving what God eats and what comes out in His poo. Since you took such care to point out that you were totally and completely serious, I assumed you were protesting too much and thus maybe being a smart-ass.

I'm not always serious, but I assure you I'm quite serious about wondering whether you're serious.

"That is all" is from God's butt. I don't know where it's from.

Excalibur!

Bob: I think it's a perfectly legitimate line of thought and questioning about the nature of God. Not all the questions are about what you are fixating on. I can only repeat, one last time, that I am both sincere, serious and respectful on the subject.

"That is all" is an old military public address sign-off, isn't it?

It's a bit curt though, don't you think?

For whatever reason, I came across your blog and felt that I have had many of the same questions that you have had and feel that I have decent answers to 8 out of 10 of the questions you posed. I would be glad to discuss them with you in more detail if you are seriously interested.

1. God appears to be unique, one of a kind, a genuine singularity, but is there really only one?

ANWER: Yes, there is only one God as far as we are concerned (Our Father in Heaven) but there are many exalted beings who possess His same omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience, and can be considered as Gods, but they are not "our" God. Our God, was once as a man, and we too have the potential to become like God, (not in this life, but after we die, are resurrected, and continue to progress over what may take thousands of years).

2. If, as all the current religious writings seem to say, there is only one entity of this omnipotent genre, it lives alone. Sure, it has all of us, and possibly all the known universe, its creations, to care for, but is s/he lonely?

ANSER: He does not live alone, he lives with all those who also share in his exalted state and he is able to visit all those who don't share his exalted state. He has a wife, who is also perfected, yet we do not worship her. His work and glory is to bring to pass the eternal life and immortality of his children (us people on earth). Just as a father, I wish for my children to grow up and be happy, our Heavenly Father works for the same thing and has provided for us a path to return to live with him.

3. One of the problems doubters have is the absence of any physical manifestation. Let's face it, if God turned up in all their terrifying glory, it would instantly squash all questions of existence. If God is alone and possibly lonely, why doesn't s/he hang out more?

ANSWER: The plan/path that he has laid out for us to be able to return to his presence requires us to live on this earth by faith. In this life, we are in a probationary state without direct revelation (God showing himself to each of us) of his existence to each one of us, we are required to search, inquire, and live in such a way that we learn of his existence through the power of the Holy Ghost. He separates his physical self from us because the glory of his body would disintegrate our mortal bodies without our bodies going under special preparation. If he showed himself to the world now, people would no longer be required to live by faith, they would have a sure knowledge, and our ability to continue to be tested as to our faithfulness would be hindered. His plan which places us in a probationary state where we do not have a sure knowledge of his existence would be thwarted.

4. On the other hand, perhaps God is not alone, but one of a whole species or race of beings simply way more advanced and evolved than we are. If there are more, where are they? And what are they doing?

ANSWER: He is not alone, he is with a race of exalted Human Beings who are more advanced and evolved that we are in our current condition. God's physical presence is located close to the star Kolob as revealed by his prophets. Prophets are special witnesses who God chooses. He speaks with these witnesses and then charges them to teach his other children on earth about him. This has always been his pattern for speaking and leading his children. We do not know where Kolob is in our current universe/Galaxy as it has not yet been revealed but it is in a definite place in our Universe.

5. If God is actually a physical being, s/he must actually be somewhere, even if they are omnipresent and all-knowing. Where is God physically located?

ANSWER: Answered in the questions above. Someday we will learn exactly where Kolob along with the Physical location of God is located. God has created more than just this earth. He has created other worlds (planets) without number where he also has his children.

6. As far as we can tell, with our limited understanding, all living things need regular inputs of fuel, what we call food. Does this universal rule also apply to God? And if so, what does s/he eat?

ANSWER: Heavenly father can eat but does not require food to survive. Jesus Christ, his son, demonstrated this ability when he returned to the earth after his resurrection (in which he received an immortal, godlike perfect body, of flesh and bone, not flesh and blood) and ate fish with his disciples on the road to Amaeus as written in the New Testament.

7. As a follow on question, all living things also produce by-products of the refueling process. If God eats, do they also have waste products and what does s/he do with them?

ANSWER: I assume this would be possible but have no information to answer this question.

8. Similarly, all energetic systems produce heat as another by-product of existence. If s/he consumes, why can't we detect a heat signature?

ANSWER: This makes sense but I do not have an answer to this question.

9. And whilst pondering these issues, there seems to be certain universal laws of nature. Does God also obey the laws of nature?

ANSWER: Yes, God obeys the universal laws of nature and he understands them better than we do so his ability to do things within their framework surpasses our understanding. Whether or not he made the laws or not, I do not know.

10. I, for one, would prefer a universe with active gods that one could call upon for guidance and support - and not only because it would completely change the mostly predictable world in which we live. Does God's infinite patience and indulgence of us, its creations according to dogma, go to such lengths that if it came to it, s/he would actually allow us to blow ourselves out of existence through the development of ever more terrible weapons?


ANSWER: We can call upon him for guidance and he will answer us. Understanding the true nature of God is one of the most important things we can do in this life. I have received assurance through the power of the holy ghost and prayer that the things I have shared with you are true.

God has given agency to his children, and as part of the desire to allow us to walk the path of faith, he interferes with the agency he has given us only rarely. He allows men such as Hitler, to come into the world and lead his children astray without intervening. He does promise appropriate judgement justice for these individuals in the next life.

In certain instances, he does choose to intervene to keep his plan on progress. I imagine, he would intervene if a weapon of enough mass destruction to wipe every living being off the planet were triggered. This is just speculation on my part, but I do know that his prophesied plan will go forward and so the complete destruction of our planet would thwart the ability for his plan to be executed and this would then make him a liar, which if it were true, would mean that he would not be God. Therefore, intervention is likely.

You've caught me and my militaristic tendencies. Attention, soldier!

Do you understand me, Pyle?

That is all.

I believe the philosopher St. Anselm had a concise proof that God exists - I don't remember the details, but it's along the lines of being the thing greater than the greatest thing we can imagine. You'd have to track it down for the specifics - I always likened it to Descatres' "I think, therefore I am...I think."

Firstly, apolgies for not posting sooner, some real world stuff had to be taken care of.

It wsn't all bad cos I needed a bit of time to absorb B's long comment. I must admit to being a bit taken aback. Here's me trying to get my head round the already difficult subject of God, and now there's all this other stuff to consider.

I must confess to having an instinctive hard time with some of the ideas laid out there but, as always, and as B has reassuringly done several times in their writing, I will always follow the evidence. Please feel free to flesh out these ideas if you don't mind.

Bob: that's from "Full Metal Jacket" isn't it? Saw that on latenight a year or two back, intense!

Vern: I love philosophy as much as the next common person but I tend to find that it often varies between extreme vagueness and mind-numbing concept-crunching with precious little resolution.

Not familiar with St Anselm's work but, assuming it's along the lines you described, it seems to be a proposition not a proof...

Yes, the Pyle thing is from Full Metal Jacket, fatbody!

Everything you need to know about God and life is in that movie and in the work of Stanley Kubrick.

That is all.

Bob: just read your comment over on that Barger anti-religion rant and was pleasantly surprised that you actually write well, when sufficiently prodded. I especially loved you and Dave Nalle starting to see how much you have in common, now that was funny!

As to your commment here above, I can only hope this was more of your unique humour.

Alienboy, I must politely object to your description of my "Gimme That Old Time Religion" column as a "rant." Now, I dig a good rant, and I like to think I'm pretty good at ranting, but that's absolutely not what THAT column was doing.

That seems like an unfair manner of dismissing my several points in the column, which I am particularly proud of. Bluntly not buying someone's religious BS (Belief Systems) does not automatically constitute an anti-religious rant.

Note particularly the bemused and even sentimental tone of the piece, which is in a very different emotional spectrum than a "rant."

Al, I wasn't aware that a rant had to necesarily to be an explosive venting; it can also be "extravagant speech or writing", "Wild or uproarious merriment" or even "pompous or pretentious talk or writing". I actually thought it was quite funny.

And I would not dismiss a single one of your points in that particular piece, unfairly or otherwise.

"1. God appears to be unique, one of a kind, a genuine singularity, but is there really only one?"

No, there is no god, god is made up by man and not vice-versa. there has never been a shred of evidence god exisats, except people are followers and believe what they are told.

"2. If, as all the current religious writings seem to say, there is only one entity of this omnipotent genre, it lives alone. Sure, it has all of us, and possibly all the known universe, its creations, to care for, but is s/he lonely?"

Not all current religions claim there is one god, just some, and those differ on who that is, christians believe it is a nice white liberal with a hippie beard. buddhists dont believe in god. since man made god and it doesnt exist, it cant be lonely.

"3. One of the problems doubters have is the absence of any physical manifestation. Let's face it, if God turned up in all their terrifying glory, it would instantly squash all questions of existence. If God is alone and possibly lonely, why doesn't s/he hang out more?"

Because something that doesnt exist cant hang out.

"4. On the other hand, perhaps God is not alone, but one of a whole species or race of beings simply way more advanced and evolved than we are. If there are more, where are they? And what are they doing?"

If so, god doesnt exist , but there is a higher life form that we mistook for god. that is more feasible than arguing god exists, although only slightly so.

"5. If God is actually a physical being, s/he must actually be somewhere, even if they are omnipresent and all-knowing. Where is God physically located?"

Yes, hew would have to be somewhere, that is all the more proof he doesnt exist.


"6. As far as we can tell, with our limited understanding, all living things need regular inputs of fuel, what we call food. Does this universal rule also apply to God? And if so, what does s/he eat?"

Of course even "god" is not above the second law of thermodynamics.

"7. As a follow on question, all living things also produce byproducts of the refueling process. If God eats, do they also have waste products and what does s/he do with them?"

Since god is non-existant, he doesnt take a piss.

"8. Similarly, all energetic systems produce heat as another byproduct of existence. If s/he consumes, why can't we detect a heat signature?"

Because it doesnt exist.

"9. And whilst pondering these issues, there seems to be certain universal laws of nature. Does God also obey the laws of nature?"

Of course, if he didnt we could prove he existed.

"10. I, for one, would prefer a universe with active gods that one could call upon for guidance and support - and not only because it would completely change the mostly predictable world in which we live. Does God's infinite patience and indulgence of us, its creations according to dogma, go to such lengths that if it came to it, s/he would actually allow us to blow ourselves out of existence through the development of ever more terrible weapons?"

God isnt out there, its all up to us to avoid that. too bad the believers in god are the ones pushing us toward that cliff.

Alienboy, perhaps I'm a trifle too sensitive.

From dictionary.com:
rant: To speak or write in a angry or violent manner; rave.

v. tr.
To utter or express with violence or extravagance: a dictator who ranted his vitriol onto a captive audience.

n.
Violent or extravagant speech or writing.
A speech or piece of writing that incites anger or violence: "The vast majority [of teenagers logged onto the Internet] did not encounter recipes for pipe bombs or deranged rants about white supremacy" (Daniel Okrent).
Chiefly British. Wild or uproarious merriment.
------------
Most of that sounds angry and violent, but if you mean that in the "chiefly British" sense, I will accept that as a fine compliment.

XOX

Well Al, I am chiefly British, though happily living abroad - a compromise that probably suits Britain as well as me!

Like Sting's "Englishman in New York." Maybe he'll write a song about you, too.

Yeah, An Englishman in Andalucia, love it

"An Englishman in Andalucia" doesn't seem to naturally SING as well, but I bet Sting could make it work. That's why he makes the big bucks.

You just need to get some latin beat going, a little Santana or Shakira maybe.

This thread has gone so off topic

Anonymous said...
Actually, I have dumped a large amount of information on you in my previous post so I am not surprised that you are having challenges digesting it. The evidence you seek to follow will be difficult to pinpoint as ultimately the existence of God and and understanding of his nature is something that can't be proven.

As I stated above, God wants his children to undertand his intentions regarding them and has chosen a to share these intentions with us. The way he has always used since the beginning, has been by choosing special witnesses/represenatives called prophets, (Abraham, Moses,John the Baptist, Buddah? Confusius?). These prophets have direct interaction with God, unlike the rest of us, and they teach us about God's plan. The way that we can know whether or not the words of the prophets are true or not is through the power of the holy ghost. The Holy Ghost will personally manifest to us when we are hearing truth so that we can know of its veracity. Heavenly Father did not stop calling Prophets with the death of the Apostles. He has a modern Prophet on the earth today who provides us guidance from God that is specific to our day, just as ancient prophets did for the people of their time.

Most everything I shared with you regarding the nature of God in the above post was revealed to us in modern times through prophets who have actually conversed with God. These Prophets have seen Heavenly Father, and his Resurrected and Perfected Son, Jesus Christ, both heavenly beings, glorified, having bodies like you and me but perfected, with white hair, and white beards. When Heavenly father revealed himself to the modern prophets in our day, he explained that most people have lost their concept of God and do not understand his true nature. He has revealed many truths to us beyond what can be found in the Bible.

The evidence you have is that you can examine the teachings/writings of these modern day prophets, and you can examine it along with the teachings of all the previoius prophets who have been consistent for thousands of years in teaching us about Heavenly Father. With all these eyewitnesses, you can begin to increase your own faith in God and find out whether or not the things I have written are true.

Let me know if you want to know more. B

Thanks B,

Without wanting to disrespect your sincere belief, I do find this all rather difficult to accept.

I wanted to try and establish some kind of consensus as to what type of being a "god" might be, to add some clarity to what is often ignored or confused in our current thinking on the topic.

Your input, whilst illuminating, is really not helping the original thrust of my curiosity and the claims you make are simply unsubstantiated. I thank you for them but would prefer to focus on my original line of enquiry...

1.One God ..by definition
2 God was lonely..now he probally wishes he was alone sometimes
3. God "hangs out" only for those who hang In Him
4. N/A
5. God is not a physical being but a form of energy as the Holy Spirit( i prefer Holy Ghost)
6. God made the laws of nature, so he is obviously not bound by them as we are..we are not gods
7.I had a philosophy teacher once who said creation was a form of divine masturbation
8. N/A
9.See Above
10. this literally could happen at any time

1. God has no plural. god, on the other hand does.

2. God have negative emotions like loneliness? Are you serious?

3. There's this thing called faith, unsatisfactorily outlined in the bible-believing in something you're not quite sure exists, no matter what.

4. Good question there, even if there are others, only The supreme one counts.

5. Now there's a brain chewer.

6,7. um...only physical beings feed, respire and excrete. If anything, i don't think God is physical.

8. Detect God using our earthly inventions? yeah right. Even if we could, i'm sure it would be something other than heat.

9. He made the laws of nature, its up to him. However i believe that if He wants to see you, he won't come through your front door by knocking.

10. I believe he gave us parents, grandparents, teachers, good friends and counselors for that job.

stop spreading the terrorism of religion fools.
a terrorist who suicide bombs a kindergarden killing 200 innocent children deserves lesser punishment than anyone religious, you got no clue what its doing to the world.