Social Question

Dan_Lyons's avatar

If God does exist and did create the universe from nothing but her own energy, then does it follow that we, and everything in existence are God?

Asked by Dan_Lyons (5452points) May 5th, 2014

Pretty simple stuff. Let’s for the purpose of this question pretend that God does indeed exist and started the Big Bang with her own energy {as there was nothing in existence prior to this moment except for her}.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

21 Answers

kritiper's avatar

No. That would be very arrogant and likely to piss her off.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

Not anymore than the painting is part of the artist or the game is part of the programmer.

Berserker's avatar

Not unless she created us with the possibility to harness her powers, or otherwise surpass human limitations.

zenvelo's avatar

I’ll say yes, yet with this understanding: everything in creation is part of God, but is not God itself. That includes all that gets connoted in one’s belief system, including whatever evil is in the world.

ucme's avatar

So much no & a further helping of no on the side.

Aster's avatar

I don’t see it that we are God, no. But I do feel that everything in existence came *from” God and that these things are able to “tap into” God’s Being. We’re all connected to God and everything is able to connect with Him in some form or fashion. For instance, and it’s quite minor, I have a row of rose bushes. The only rose bush that is tall, healthy and blooming nicely is the one that receives the most sun and it somehow knows to lean towards the sun. And if I watered it it would bloom even further since it connects to water. By the same token, I feel that the healthiest bodies are the ones that take in nutrients from vegetables and fruits while the least healthy bodies take in chemicals from tobacco , alcohol and meat. Vegetables and fruits are more connected to the earth (God) than chemicals. Sorry; that’s the best I can do.

AstroChuck's avatar

Her? First off, as George Carlin once said, God has to be a man. No woman could f**k things up this badly.

thorninmud's avatar

There are some difficult philosophical conclusions that arise if you adopt this premise, and I think this explains why theologians have avoided it. One is that it forces you to conclude that God includes evil, and that’s an unpalatable morsel to swallow.

Another is that “God” pretty much loses meaning in this scheme. If there is only God, then the concept of God falls apart. Buddhists recognize this and embrace the resulting “emptiness”, but it really doesn’t work well in most other theologies, which need a God that can be considered apart from other things.

I remember hearing about a Sufi poet who, in some of his poems, came this close to erasing the separation between Allah and himself, but had to retreat from that position because it was heretical to the Muslim establishment. Some of the Christian mystics, like Meister Eckhart, were judged heretical because they, too, failed to keep God nicely separate: ”“The eye through which I see God is the same eye through which God sees me; my eye and God’s eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowing, one love.”

Blondesjon's avatar

@thorninmud . . . Meister Eckhart was a Rasta?

SavoirFaire's avatar

No, it does not follow. It could turn out to be true for other reasons, but it is not logically entailed by the conditions specified. Nor does it follow that creation is a part of God. Consider a parallel example: if I bite off the ends of my fingernails and spit them on the floor, I have created a bunch of separate objects using only myself as a resource. Yet the discarded bits of fingernail are neither me nor parts of me (at least not anymore).

RealEyesRealizeRealLies's avatar

All part of God’s evil plan.

Winter_Pariah's avatar

I don’t know, do we consider our shit to be a part of us?

Frankly, if there is a God, I cannot imagine it being benevolent or really actually caring for anything in existence, hence the shit analogy. If there is a “god” then it’s an existence to either overcome, be consumed by, or disposed by via the Big Flush.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

^^^ Your shit may be part of you, but as for me, it is merely stuff taking a trip through me.

When you create something from nothing using only your very life essence as the building material, that is very different from painting with paints you got from the store on a canvas you got from the store.

@Symbeline That is absolutely correct.
@AstroChuck George was wrong on that one. There are many women fuckups.
@Aster You came very close.
@thorninmud Correct. It is all god, including what we term evil (which isn’t really evil at all, from a certain point of view.
If there is only God does not cause the concept of God to fall apart, it actually reinforces it. Nor does it result in emptiness.
Organized religions cannot afford to have their adherents believing this philosophy because it would spell the end of organized religions as we know them.
@SavoirFaire Unfortunately, you did not create your nails from nothing. Your example is fun but not a logical conclusion from the conditions specified.

kevbo's avatar

There’s an old saying to this effect: Ātman is Brahman.

tinyfaery's avatar

Yes. You are now enlightened.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Dan_Lyons It’s an analogy, and analogies do not need to be exact to perform their logical function. They only need to share a relevant point of similarity. The relevant point of similarity here is creation from one’s own substance. Given your latest response, however, it looks like this was not asked as a genuine question. Instead, it looks like a test to see if we share your intuitions (which you seem to believe are indicative of fact).

Dan_Lyons's avatar

^^^ Yes, but your analogy does not perform a logical function\ because there was no relevant point of similarity. Your fingernails are not your substance. And then you turn this into a personal attack. hmmmm, Typical.
Y’know, if someone would actually prove that God does not exist, i would be the first on the bandwagon.

Paradox25's avatar

I’m of the opinion that thought (or sentience) itself is God, and thought may be the only truly real ‘thing’ in the entire universe. I’d have to answer your question with a yes.

Dan_Lyons's avatar


It’s a Paradox.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Dan_Lyons My fingernails are part of me, so they are—by definition—part of my own substance. And that’s the analogy: creating something (separate) out of what currently counts as myself. For the record, I teach logic (among other things) for a living. I understand how analogical reasoning works.

And noting that you clearly aren’t interested in genuine answers isn’t a personal attack. It’s an observation regarding your responses. By merely declaring them correct or incorrect as if from above—rather than actually engaging with them and explaining why you agree or disagree with them—you reveal that you have already made up your mind.

Finally, nothing I said has anything to do with whether or not God exists. It’s simply a matter of what follows from what. It does not follow from God’s existence plus an act of creation from God’s own substance (or energy, as the case may be) that everything is God or is part of God. This is a logical relation, and it holds regardless of whether or not God exists.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@SavoirFaire Nicely played. Have a lovely day.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther