God = The Universe

God and The Universe are one and same

Think about all the attributes assigned to God – omnipresent, omnipotent, infinite, eternal, glorious, wondrous. All of these apply to The Universe, surrounding us, supporting us, stretching beyond our vision and comprehension.

Is it that much of a leap of faith to see The Universe as a sentient being?

Consider the complexity of life on Earth – the interaction of diversified cells, chemical compounds and electrical impulses within the human body as well as the bodies of all other organisms on Earth; the symbiotic relationships among all fauna and flora in the biosphere. All of this could not have happened by accident. Someone had to plan it. That someone is The Universe.

Intelligent design is not just an euphemism coined to slip creationism into public school classrooms. It is a succinct description of The Universe – moving in mysterious and purposeful ways.

The existence of the mind raises the human above the slug, as well as all other land-based lifeforms on Earth.

God clearly is the universe and everything inside it. Including yourself. We are god.

There is a logic to this. Everything in aggregate is God. Consider the definition of God: omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent.

Omnipotent (all powerful): there is power in the universe, and everything in aggregate would contain all power.

Omniscient (all knowing): there is conscience in the universe, and the sum of all conscience would equal the sum of all knowledge.

Omnipresent (everywhere): The aggregate placement of the universe is everywhere.

This definition would also explain the various attributes defined in most religions. Except heaven. If this is true, then you are already there.

However, I do not find proof of planning. I exist. But I have no proof of planning myself to exist. I just exist. God may not have planed existence, but just was. Is that improbable? If this was not here, what would be?

Nothing is impossible. No, I mean nothing is not possible.

If nothing is not possible, into what is the Universe expanding?

This is like asking what is x/0. The universe has no edge. Space-time folds in on itself.

I know that this is hard to imagine, but space-time is a foundational component of the universe. Space-time is a derivative of the big bang. We are stuck within space-time, and cannot imagine without it. One cannot 'step outside' the universe as you imagine.

So what is a number divided by zero? Not zero. It is undefined. Zero is zero, nothing is nothing; but x/0 is not 0.

REBerg, in your original statement, you have already answered this. If the universe = God, as you propose, then what is outside of God? If God is everywhere, as you propose, where is not-God?

If there is an 'outside,' then your proposition falls apart, for then there is something larger than God, of which God would be but a part within.

I think he's trying to pull a fast one and get us to acknowledge the theory of intelligent design, no way man no freaking way.

Personally I'm agnostic, and on the question of good being the universe, there are an infinite number of universes according to science and the hubble telescope, no matter how much we improve it comes to a sort of issue with the distance it can see, we can't see as far into the universe so who is to say that the universe isn't finite? That we aren't on a pedestal in a greater universe and one on top of that, even the theory of relativity has been disproven.

Seriously no one knows.

Pickup, you are correct that M theory has a multi-verse as a consequence. And as much as I have read on string theory, M theory makes mathematical sense, although empirical evidence would be hard to come by. (Sorry, but the Hubble telescope cannot 'see' outside the universe we are in. In fact, it is calculated that we will never be able to see much more than 40% of the universe, and even less as time goes on. And the theory of relativity has not been disproved, it has been found to be incomplete. That is, it does not explain quantum mechanics on a macro level. Einstein refused to consider quantum theory and argued with Neils Bhor over the model. Bhor proved to be right. Einstein also introduced the Cosmological Constant in his equations out of necessity. Later, this was shown to be dark energy, but Einstein did not know this at the time. String theory can be explained utilizing the exchange of particles [gauge bosons] in the strong force between quarks.)

But, I was staying inside the boundaries of the topic. I will concede that one could define everything as God, utilizing the logic at hand. But, like you, I cannot concede preemptive planning, or an individual intelligence apart from everything in aggregate. Therefore, I too would have to deny proof of 'intelligent design.'

Pickup, having reread your comment, aside from some errors in the science, I will have to agree with you that the motive of wanting design is to centralize the individual as the purpose of the universe. It is not acceptable to many that we are not the reason for the universe.

Truth is, we are beings on a planet which is circling an 'average' sun, on an outer band in an 'average' spiral galaxy.

We even like to think that our brains developed our digestive system so that the brain might have better nutrition. It is more accurate to say that our digestive system developed brains in order to be better at finding food.

All evidence shows that we are not the reason for the universe, but merely a by-product. The concept of 'a reason' for the universe is itself nonsensical. It presupposes a preemptive intelligence that does not exist.

I am definitely not a believer in “Intelligent Design” as espoused by certain religious zealots bent on replacing evolution with creationism. God did not create Man in his own image.

I believe that The Universe created the elements which allowed life to form and endowed rudimentary life with the ability to evolve and survive changing conditions. Was The Universe just having a boring Saturday night and decided to fool around with few chemical compounds, maybe an amino acid or two, then sit back and see what happened? Was it a purposeful experiment with an anticipated outcome?

Who knows? When I look at the complexity and organization of life, both within and among the creatures of this world, I am forced to conclude that some sort of guiding force is involved. At this point, science gives way to personal beliefs. I have my own, but I am not one to expect others to think as I do. I leave that to organized religions.

The theory of multiple universes seems logical, although it eventually ends at the same place. Assuming that our universe and all of its universal brethren are expanding, will they, at some point, meet and coalesce into a Superuniverse? What then, multiple superuniverses expanding to become an Ultrauniverse? Ad infinitum; I've run out of possible labels.

It would seem, at least from my own layman's perspective, that a finite container needs to enter the theoretical picture at some point. One Universe is sufficient for my own attempts at comprehension and belief system construction. Thinking of that Universe as God works for me.

Where we run into disagreement is the need for a 'finite container.' And once you think in terms of finite, then you must have something outside of that. There is no 'outside.'

As you point out, if there is an outside, then there must be another outside, ad infinitum. The fallacy itself demonstrates the problem of thinking in these terms.

I myself have conceptual problems with the picture physics paints. But my deficit in conception is not a reason to deny the proof.

The other problem is a perception of organization that actually does not exist. The universe is very disorganized, and becoming more so. The probability of the rise of any particular form is best expressed using chaos theory.

I am not sure how to explain this in simple terms, but matter itself can be reduced to a wave. This is where string theory gets really strange. Imagine the vibration of a one dimensional massless particle, and you begin to get the idea.

The best layman's explanation I have seen is Stephen Hawking's The Grand Design. A good read, and I strongly recommend it to anyone trying to get their mind around this.

If video is more to your liking, you can also start here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/elegant-universe.html

Ah, The Universe as an infinite set of Russian nesting dolls. Are we situated in the innermost or outermost doll? Theoretical physics, whether big bang or string, is not that far removed from spiritual belief. Neither can offer absolute proof, although both sides have their devotees. I would prefer to avoid being locked in a logic loop until my mind overloads and shuts down – ala Captain Kirk vs. the robotic entity of the week. Thanks for the video and reading offerings.