- Status
A
ANV
Guest
But these are a part of physical realities and atheism is just a disbelief in gods.
J
JimG
Guest
When discussing the nature of God, I always recommend Frank Sheed’s “Theology for Beginners,” and “Theology and Sanity.”
S
STT
Guest
No, the Pythagorean Theorem only exists in mind of intelligent being. We comprehend it and store it for when we need it.
A
animalis
Guest
I think you could safely conclude from which one aspect concerning visibility is dependence amongst things that are visible. If it is visible, it depends on others that are visible. But that does not answer why he is invisible.
It proper to look at God from what he is not, then to vainly attempt ‘from’ what he is. (cf. CCC 42, 43)
But what about the Blessed Sacrament? Is God, therefore, dependent, whereas St. Hilary says he is self-sufficient. I would need to refine the question to something more manageable. But to do that would be vain because it is a mystery in its visibility.
It proper to look at God from what he is not, then to vainly attempt ‘from’ what he is. (cf. CCC 42, 43)
But what about the Blessed Sacrament? Is God, therefore, dependent, whereas St. Hilary says he is self-sufficient. I would need to refine the question to something more manageable. But to do that would be vain because it is a mystery in its visibility.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Can they be detected with senses or a microscope? If not why not?
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
If you are not open to the existence of invisible substances then how would you identify a visible God? How would you define one?
No material being it seems to me is immune from decay of its form and therefore would not be immortal.
Its hard to give the name God to such a being…though maybe god with a small g.
G
Gorgias
Guest
So, the fact that “the sum of the squares of the lengths of two sides of a right triangle equals the square of the length of the third” only came into existence when it existed in the mind of an intelligent being? Not before? And, if all on earth should die except people who don’t know the Pythagorean Theorem, then this truth would cease to exist?
(Not this particular formulation of the truth, mind you – just the truth itself.)
I’m not seeing how your claim makes sense.
S
STT
Guest
I am open to concept invisible substance, something which does not interact with matter. I am against the concept of something without form which can hold information.
S
STT
Guest
Yes, concepts do not ontological existence. We just experience them as a result of mental activity, thinking.So, the fact that “the sum of the squares of the lengths of two sides of a right triangle equals the square of the length of the third” only came into existence when it existed in the mind of an intelligent being? Not before? And, if all on earth should die except people who don’t know the Pythagorean Theorem, then this truth would cease to exist?
(Not this particular formulation of the truth, mind you – just the truth itself.)
I’m not seeing how your claim makes sense.
B
Blue_Horizon
Guest
Why do you deny that InvSub cannot relate to matter as say cause/effect? That is a basic tenet of all substantial “spirit” traditions whether secular, pagan or Christian.
You also deny that spirit can be personal or intelligent?
So “God” for you could be spirit (ie an invisible substance) so long as not a person or able to understand and not intelligent.
I am struggling to imagine if the normal word God ckuld ever be predicated of any such thing?
What are you thinking would foot the bill?
M
mdgspencer
Guest
The question makes as much sense as an angel asking why men are visible. So, why not?
J
Jerbear
Guest
I’ve studied physics and I never understood this sentence. If someone says ‘what’s before the Big Bang’, the answer is ‘nothing’. If the Big Bang was the start of time, there can’t be a ‘before the Big Bang’ since there wasn’t time yet. Whenever we use words like before, after, inside, outside, we need two times/locations so we can compare them. If there was no time before the Big Bang, you can’t have a before.
The same applies to being ‘outside of space’. Again, when we say something is outside, we are referencing two different spacial coordinates. If something is ‘outside space’ then it doesn’t have space coordinates and we can no longer compare it to space-time. Just like there is no ‘before the Big Bang’ there is no ‘outside space’
T
tonyrey
Guest
- Materialists overlook the fact that our primary datum and sole certainty is our mental activity with which we infer the existence of the physical universe and other minds.
- All the most valuable aspects of reality are intangible: truth, goodness, freedom, justice, beauty and love which presuppose the existence of persons.
- The highest and most powerful mode of existence is not physical but personal.
- Science would not exist without rational minds which are independent of time and space.
- Rational minds presuppose the existence of a Supreme Mind
S
STT
Guest
Because the absence of interaction means the absence of cause and effect.
Again, I am not against the concept of invisible spirit. I am against the concept of something which has no form.
- Status