Dear God…

March 18th, 2008


People tell me You are infinite, that You are all things.

Is that true?

I mean, are You really all things?

If so, does that mean You are Satan as well as being You?

That’s assuming there is a Satan.

Just asking.

16 Responses to “Dear God…”

  1. Muufmannon 18 Mar 2008 at

    Infinite – yes but I don’t think God is all things. Ultimate creator & all that but there are loads of things which, by definition, God cannot be, wrong or evil to name just two. Nor is God a teapot.

    God as the first cause / creator of all things cannot also be that which he created.

    ps – Isn’t this thread a lot like praying?

  2. Declan Chellaron 19 Mar 2008 at

    infinite = subject to no limitation

    “God cannot be evil” is a limitation.

    Therefore God cannot be infinite.

    I wouldn’t call it praying. I’m sure lots of people think I’m going to “hell” anyway just for being agnostic, so I might as well ask some questions as I burn.

  3. Paraic Hegartyon 19 Mar 2008 at

    Not sure what religions think that God IS all things. I think Christianity says that God is ‘creator of all that is, seen and unseen’ (i.e. including Satan) and that ‘God is everywhere’.

  4. Caitlinon 19 Mar 2008 at

    I think of God as that which exists prior to form. Things are form. So, I can see how “god is all things” can be viewed as a correct (in my opinion) statement, but linguistically inaccurate.

    Once there is judgement (good/evil) there is form, once there is “being”, there is form. And *if* god is that which can *become* any form (thoughts, judgements, things) then god is indeed “infinite” and can be/become all “things”.

    I guess I really don’t believe there is a “Satan” unless I think of it as a metaphor for our own voice of ego/conditioning. Which isn’t “evil” to me, but is the part of me that feels most connected to what my version of “hell” is.

    Of course if this is questioning Christian rhetoric I have no idea what I’m talking about…I know that religion the least. :) And of course, no matter what I am only speaking about what feels true for me…not trying to say that this is “truth” or right.

  5. Paraic Hegartyon 19 Mar 2008 at

    I believe :-) that Nobby is a Catholic agnostic :-)

  6. Muufmannon 20 Mar 2008 at

    Disagree with your conclusion but there you go. I think your argument relies on the assumption that an infinite being MUST occupy all states (ie good and evil) and I don’t think this true.

    Heaven / Hell – I wouldn’t know who is headed where. I am sure, when it’s all said and done, we all will all be where we deserve to be.

  7. Declan Chellaron 20 Mar 2008 at

    That’s the handy thing about being agnostic I don’t even have to believe in my own conclusions!

    Bear in mind that my basic premise is that everything I think I know may be wrong.

    All I’m doing is asking questions and maybe one day I’ll stumble across an answer.

    I consider myself fortunate to have friends who can disagree with me on many things and still be my friends.

  8. Declan Chellaron 20 Mar 2008 at


    I can’t deny the influence of my catholic upbringing.

    I may not have faith in God, but I do believe it’s morally wrong for girls to wear patent leather shoes!

  9. Declan Chellaron 20 Mar 2008 at

    Damn! We need to have a few drinks in Boston next week!
    Everyone has their own idea of God. I’m willing to bet no two popes have ever had the same idea of God. That’s what makes religious dogma so laughable to me. I don’t have an idea of God simply because any idea I did come up with would be guesswork and fantasy.

  10. Declan Chellaron 20 Mar 2008 at

    I wasn’t making any assumptions. I was simply explaining what I meant by “infinite”, which is “not subject to limitations”.
    I understood that this was a basic part of the concept of God… God is not subject to limitations.
    However, as soon as you say “God is…” you are imposing a limitation.
    In my mind, you cannot say “God is good” any more than you can say “God is evil”.
    That’s assuming you believe God is infinite, which I don’t and which is a logical contradiction anyway.

  11. Muufmannon 21 Mar 2008 at


    How could a thing be two mutually exclusive things / states? Lets say one state is sentience and another non-sentience. How could a thing be both sentient and non-sentient? They seem to me to be mutually exclusive.

    My belief, for what it is worth, is that, as the first creative force, God exists outside time and space. This is how to reconcile the “exists forever” conundrum since before creation there was no time.

    We live in this bubble of space / time and from our perspective it is ordered and more or less linear. God lives outside of it and sees it all at once, Alpha & Omega and so forth, its all one event. I am not sure we can really fully comprehend or explain this from our limited perspective.

    When we die we “step” outside the bubble. My thought is that then the kind of closeness you feel to a spouse or loved one is experienced with all souls but at a far higher / infinitely greater level than when in the bubble.


  12. Declan Chellaron 22 Mar 2008 at

    I was just wondering about the notion of God having no limits. It struck me as curious that some people will say that God has no limits, but will balk at the notion that God is therefore not limited to being good.

    I assume you think God does have limits, judging by the first paragraph of your last comment.

    The irony for me is that religiously dogmatic people seem to talk about God’s being infinite, yet claim to know so much about God. It strikes me as strange that so many people can know so much about infinity and yet can’t cure the common cold.

  13. Muufmannon 23 Mar 2008 at

    If the great thing about agnosticism is you don’t have to believe your own conclusions then surely the great thing about faith is you get to believe despite the lack of physical evidence.

    I can only say what I believe to be true.
    If I am wrong I will never know.

  14. wychwoodon 24 Mar 2008 at

    Well, I may as well jump into this. Muufman – if physical evidence existed you would not need faith.

    Faith is only ever needed in the absence of physical evidence, because physical evidence proves the thing exists, whereas you need faith to continue your path (or take a path, or believe in something) in the absence of concrete evidence of something you hope is there. Just my tuppence.

    Regarding the God being good part of it, Nobby, a linguistic note. “Good” used to indicate God as in the term “goodbye” which was short for “God bye you” or “God be with you”. I don’t recall which English it was, so you may need to look it up elsewhere.

  15. Muufmannon 25 Mar 2008 at

    I don’t disagree at all, i think that is what i said.
    Interesting linguistic note.

  16. Declan Chellaron 08 Apr 2008 at

    Thanks for your comments, all.

    As Muufmann, said, if he is wrong, he will never know.

    However, if I’m wrong, I hope God has a sense of humour.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply