C
catharina
Guest
By definition (Revelation), God is LOVE.
Why would you imagine that God is light?
Because certain poetic clauses point to that notion?
As others have said, God created light. (See Book of Genesis.)
- Status
Why would you imagine that God is light?
Because certain poetic clauses point to that notion?
As others have said, God created light. (See Book of Genesis.)
A triangle ceases to be a triangle if it is round.
If God were to force it, it seems to me it would be a lie.
God is effectively pointing at a circle and saying it is a triangle.
Either the circle will become a triangle (3 points and all), or the universe will cease because God has effectively removed himself by telling a lie.
In either case, we won’t be there to care.
S
strngrnrth
Guest
A black hole would do just what God wants it to do. His limits are His creations too, I think, and therfore based on His inclination. thus, He has deceived, but only to bring a greater truth. Rahab lied to spies and was counted as saved by her action and the faith it required.
J
jimmy
Guest
Then should we worship the sun or the lights in our home since they send forth God? No, because God as light is not the same thing as physical light. No theologian in the history of the Church actually believed that God was the light in the sense of what causes us to see and is a wave/matter. Aquinas distinguished between four types of light I believe. There was the light of the senses which as modern theoretical physics says can’t escape a black hole. There is the light of the intellect which allows us to see what is rational and true. There is the divine light which is nothing other than God Himself. The comparison to physical light is only analogical.
J
jimmy
Guest
Actually the idea of God as light is an ancient idea. It is an aspect of Christian imagery of God. The Byzantine Catholics have a strong sense of it.
K
kepha1
Guest
One of the sophisticated concepts used by great Christian theologians is that of “The Ground of Being.” This concept indicates not that God is the fact of things existing, but that God is the basis for the existence of all things. God is more fundamental to existing things than anything else. So fundamental to the existence of all things is God, that God can be thought of as the basis upon which things exist, the ground their being. To say that God is The ground of being or being itself, is to say that there is something we can sense that is so special about the nature of being that it hints at this fundamental reality upon which all else is based.
The phrases “Ground of Being” and “Being itself” are basically the same concept. Tillich used both at different times, and other theologians such as John McQuarrey prefer “Being Itself,” but they really speak to the same concept. Now skeptics are always asking “how can god be being?” I think this question comes from the fact that the term is misleading. The term “Being itself” gives one the impression that God is the actual fact of “my existence,” or the existence of my flowerbed, or any object one might care to name. Paul Tillich, on the other hand, said explicitly (in Systematic Theology Vol. I) that this does not refer to an existential fact but to an ontological status.
What is being said is not that God is the fact of the being of some particular object, but, that he is the basis upon which being proceeds and upon which objects participate in being. In other words, since God exists forever, nothing else can come to be without God’s will or thought; and since there can’t even be a potential for any being without God’s thought, all potentialities for being arise in the “mind of God” then in that sense God is actually “Being Itself.” I think “Ground of Being” is a less confusing term. God is the ground upon which all being is based and from which all being proceeds. (including black holes)
The concept of the Ground of Being.
The phrases “Ground of Being” and “Being itself” are basically the same concept. Tillich used both at different times, and other theologians such as John McQuarrey prefer “Being Itself,” but they really speak to the same concept. Now skeptics are always asking “how can god be being?” I think this question comes from the fact that the term is misleading. The term “Being itself” gives one the impression that God is the actual fact of “my existence,” or the existence of my flowerbed, or any object one might care to name. Paul Tillich, on the other hand, said explicitly (in Systematic Theology Vol. I) that this does not refer to an existential fact but to an ontological status.
What is being said is not that God is the fact of the being of some particular object, but, that he is the basis upon which being proceeds and upon which objects participate in being. In other words, since God exists forever, nothing else can come to be without God’s will or thought; and since there can’t even be a potential for any being without God’s thought, all potentialities for being arise in the “mind of God” then in that sense God is actually “Being Itself.” I think “Ground of Being” is a less confusing term. God is the ground upon which all being is based and from which all being proceeds. (including black holes)
The concept of the Ground of Being.
C
catharina
Guest
Thank you for the spin off from my statement.
Yes, Christian imagery = certain poetic clauses.
Easter Vigil announces “Light of Christ.”
God is self-defined as LOVE.
J
jimmy
Guest
God is also defined as Truth though. He has called Himself Yahweh as well which basically means ‘I am near’ according to Pope Benedict’s interpretation of Exodus4 in Introduction to Christianity. Love is not the only term that can be used in reference to God. God is Love, God is Truth, God is Light.
C
catharina
Guest
From the Baltimore Catechism, published in 1941.
I memorized this in childhhod - it’s less poetic and maybe more specific:
“2. Who is God?
God is the Supreme Being, infinitely perfect, Who made all things and keeps them in existence.”
G
GreenLantern
Guest
Well if God created everything then God created truth. Therefore God has jurisdiction over what is true and what isn’t. So can’t God make it so that it would be true for a triangle to be round somehow through His omnipotence?
God cannot make a lie truth.
That runs contrary to the very properties that he has given them.
The very definition of triangle means it is not round.
Round is something else entirely.
What you seem to suggest is that God could simply alter the vocabulary. But that would not work since the object is more then the words used to describe it.
Consider…if we call the tail a leg, how many legs does a horse have? If you answer five, you are wrong. A horse has four legs, calling a tail a leg does not make it so.
A
ABostonCatholic
Guest
I’ve always understood God to be light in a purely metaphorical sense…
God isn’t made of photons, for God isn’t a body…
I suppose God could be a “wave”, but he would still need some body to exist.
Thus God is not light in a literal sense.
Likewise, if God is light, then darkness is the absence of God. Maybe that’s why so many crimes and sins are committed at night.
God isn’t made of photons, for God isn’t a body…
I suppose God could be a “wave”, but he would still need some body to exist.
Thus God is not light in a literal sense.
Likewise, if God is light, then darkness is the absence of God. Maybe that’s why so many crimes and sins are committed at night.
G
geekborj
Guest
It is a misconception that “God is light,” literally speaking. When we say God is Light, this is an expression that He guides us in Darkness, the Source of Understanding (“light”).
I do not concede on this idea of the literal “God is light.” This would pin God as being “just the light.” This concept has a tint of pantheism.
A
ABostonCatholic
Guest
If God is light does that make Thomas Edison the Virgin Mary?
G
Gloria1
Guest
Yes God is light but remember that nothing can be compared to God. The idea of “light” here is just one of His characteristics but “light” per se, is not God. Remember God is Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, etc. so God is “light” is just like saying God is Omnipotent or Omniscient. Eventhough black hole exists, in terms of God, the idea of black hole is just an illusion. Black hole can just be compared to the idea of “light” but not the idea of God since we cannot tell who or how God is but just some of the ways He works. thanks for sharing
M
Mighty_Q
Guest
If photons have mass, does that make them Catholic?
H
HelenRose
Guest
I have often wonder if gravity isn’t the supreme miracle. Perhaps the supreme act of love. I ask this because I can not understand it at all. My little mind simply can not grasp the concept of time/space.
Without gravity there is nothing. With gravity there is everything.
Without gravity there is nothing. With gravity there is everything.
V
Verbum
Guest
Hi All,
I can’t understand how such a thread has gone so far. God is called the light of the world not because he IS light, but because he enlightens our minds and souls. God has nothing of the material world. He cannot be perceived by anything material. Black hole indeed!
Verbum
I can’t understand how such a thread has gone so far. God is called the light of the world not because he IS light, but because he enlightens our minds and souls. God has nothing of the material world. He cannot be perceived by anything material. Black hole indeed!
Verbum
H
Hastrman
Guest
No, but it makes Nikola Tesla (who invented the lightbulb before Edison) her.
E
East_and_West
Guest
When we say God is light, we this only by analogy. We do not actually believe him to be photons or wavelengths. We simply use light as imagery to describe his Goodness and Truth. Rather, God is spirit.
- Status