Did God occupy any space before creation?
- Thread starter PaulThomson
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
That's really interesting.
Glad you jumped in brother.
I think the overarching issue here is really one of theology proper, which is the study of God himself.
When this is lacking, even among really nice people, we end up with all kinds of "perceived" conundrums which, upon more investigation, don't really exist.
Here's an example from a post you quoted.
PaulThomas, with the best intentions I'm sure, spoke about how "persons" require "time" to engage in logical and sequential conversation. So God must need this kind of time for members of the Godhead to communicate. But the comparison, unfortunately, gets into a common error right at the outset. Although God is a "person", he is not a "human person." So the dimensions that bind humans, like time and space, simply don't have the same effect on God, as he is not one of one us.
But I do think the "agreement" between members of the Godhead doesn't NEED to transcend time, as I think it just transcends any necessity. The members of the trinity are, and always have been, in perfect agreement in all things. They all know what they are thinking, and they are all in agreement. So for them to "agree" on something, no time is even required... they are just in perpetual agreement by nature.
Anyway, it's all interesting stuff.
God Bless.
..
Glad you jumped in brother.
I think the overarching issue here is really one of theology proper, which is the study of God himself.
When this is lacking, even among really nice people, we end up with all kinds of "perceived" conundrums which, upon more investigation, don't really exist.
Here's an example from a post you quoted.
PaulThomas, with the best intentions I'm sure, spoke about how "persons" require "time" to engage in logical and sequential conversation. So God must need this kind of time for members of the Godhead to communicate. But the comparison, unfortunately, gets into a common error right at the outset. Although God is a "person", he is not a "human person." So the dimensions that bind humans, like time and space, simply don't have the same effect on God, as he is not one of one us.
But I do think the "agreement" between members of the Godhead doesn't NEED to transcend time, as I think it just transcends any necessity. The members of the trinity are, and always have been, in perfect agreement in all things. They all know what they are thinking, and they are all in agreement. So for them to "agree" on something, no time is even required... they are just in perpetual agreement by nature.
Anyway, it's all interesting stuff.
God Bless.
..
-
1
- Show all
really glad in my heart to see you here too, Max
so, on that point you brought up, yes - and that means the prayer at Gethsemane isn't for Christ's sake, but for ours, and perhaps also for the angels. He said these things, prayed these things, so they would be written, and we would read them - like an aside in a play, voiced in order to inform the audience about the nuances of the drama.
in light of what you said, Gethsemane becomes AMAZING - it's incomprehensible, God praying to Himself, aloud, repeatedly waking the disciples up to witness it... not unlike Abraham falling into a deep sleep while He confirms the covenant - in fact exactly like it, the smoke and the fire passing between the divided creatures
it's a testimony
so, on that point you brought up, yes - and that means the prayer at Gethsemane isn't for Christ's sake, but for ours, and perhaps also for the angels. He said these things, prayed these things, so they would be written, and we would read them - like an aside in a play, voiced in order to inform the audience about the nuances of the drama.
in light of what you said, Gethsemane becomes AMAZING - it's incomprehensible, God praying to Himself, aloud, repeatedly waking the disciples up to witness it... not unlike Abraham falling into a deep sleep while He confirms the covenant - in fact exactly like it, the smoke and the fire passing between the divided creatures
it's a testimony
Maybe.
When Christ was here in the flesh, he had two distinct natures... so that IS a thing that gets confusing and complicated.
I know a great Christian scholar who teaches on the basic attributes of God in about 15 classes... then spends about 50-60 classes trying to explain the nature of Christ.
: )
There are many things the scripture says Christ did, and explained, just for the sake of his followers.
But that doesn't mean everything he went through was sort of distant from him, like acting out a play.
He really did suffer, and he really did get hungry, and he really did experience all the normal things humans experience.
He never suffered from a lack of faith, or lack of proper motives, or a lack of clarity or direction.
But he still walked with us and suffered... he was just exempt from the kind of suffering caused by personal sin.
So, although he did say and do a lot of things just for his followers to hear, I think even those moments were full of real seriousness and gravity for him.
The incarnate Christ was unique in the universe.
Thinking through his words and actions, really trying to understand them, is a lifelong pursuit. And a great pursuit.
When trying to understand Christ... I spend a lot of time just feeling pretty ignorant.
: )
.
When Christ was here in the flesh, he had two distinct natures... so that IS a thing that gets confusing and complicated.
I know a great Christian scholar who teaches on the basic attributes of God in about 15 classes... then spends about 50-60 classes trying to explain the nature of Christ.
: )
There are many things the scripture says Christ did, and explained, just for the sake of his followers.
But that doesn't mean everything he went through was sort of distant from him, like acting out a play.
He really did suffer, and he really did get hungry, and he really did experience all the normal things humans experience.
He never suffered from a lack of faith, or lack of proper motives, or a lack of clarity or direction.
But he still walked with us and suffered... he was just exempt from the kind of suffering caused by personal sin.
So, although he did say and do a lot of things just for his followers to hear, I think even those moments were full of real seriousness and gravity for him.
The incarnate Christ was unique in the universe.
Thinking through his words and actions, really trying to understand them, is a lifelong pursuit. And a great pursuit.
When trying to understand Christ... I spend a lot of time just feeling pretty ignorant.
: )
.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
not 7th?
as soon as i ascribe a dimension to love, i ask, OK what space does it live in - it has to live in a space with dimension at least 1 more than its own dimension. so then there is 'something' more than love, the dimension it exists in.
same concept that leads astrophysics to define void 1, void 0 - and why void zero gets called void zero. space itself is expanding - a bit mind blowing. for the materialist, that means literally everything that exists is expanding. you usually see people put a couple dots with a marker on a balloon, and blow it up - see, they get farther apart? and also kinda get bigger? but that's not exactly a parallel. that balloon is only a surface, but space itself is expanding in at least 3, maybe 11 measurable dimensions. maybe even more than that we just don't know how to perceive.
and in all these dimensions, however many, simultaneously.
and if ((read: since)) it's expanding, it's expanding into something - like the balloon into the air around it. so something more than the universe exists. for us maybe that's easy - God is more than the universe.
but for the materialist, the implications ofoderm physics is that something more than everything that exists, exists!
i don't believe void 0 is God, either. but these circumstances we find ourselves in, as humans in an universe, show to me God can one "space itself" - - He is more than everything. He fills heaven and earth not because He is a substrate but because heaven and earth can't contain Him; the context of that quote, Jeremiah 23:2, is that there is nothing hidden from Him. nothing that exists is outside of His awareness - so God cannot be void 1, nor confined to void 1, because, void 0 exists. and because sin and corruption exist in void 1, and there is no sin in Him, He can't be void 0, either, because it contains void 1.
He is altogether separate from His creation, like a painter is not part of her painting, though her heart is expressed in it.
-
1
- Show all
whoops typo i caught too late..
that should read, "... God can't be space itself... "
@PaulThomson my apologies i know i am a really frustrating person to argue with. no harm intended. maybe one day i will learn tact haha
very interesting thread no matter how much i might not currently agree with your current stance on the subject, thank you for that
that should read, "... God can't be space itself... "
@PaulThomson my apologies i know i am a really frustrating person to argue with. no harm intended. maybe one day i will learn tact haha
very interesting thread no matter how much i might not currently agree with your current stance on the subject, thank you for that
Maybe you are anti-anthropomorphizing. Your image of God seems to be created by negating every human-like attribute God ascribes to Himself in scripture, and replacing it with the contrary attribute on the theory that because God was not human in the old testament, He cannot be like man in any way.
However, if we were made in God's image, He must be like us in some ways: presumably in the ways He describes Himself to be in scripture.
And if He is unlike us in all ways, how could the fulness of God mesh coherently with humanity and dwell bodily and operate as a human being in Christ.
However, if we were made in God's image, He must be like us in some ways: presumably in the ways He describes Himself to be in scripture.
And if He is unlike us in all ways, how could the fulness of God mesh coherently with humanity and dwell bodily and operate as a human being in Christ.
-
1
- Show all