|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Announcement :: Peace |
|
The Omnipotence Of God (II) |
Current rating: 0 |
by Reinarto Hadipriono
Email: Reinarto (nospam) Hadipriono.com (verified)
Phone: 62 231 206980
Address: Jl. Lemahwungkuk 37 Cirebon - Indonesia |
20 Jun 2003
|
|
The fact that almost all religions believe that nothing, not even a single space or a single entity, is capable of restricting Godâ€(TM)s existence is an obvious indication that sub-atomic particles are part of God. |
The Omnipotence of God (II)
In order to prevent any possible misunderstanding on the part of the creationists concerning the explanations presented in the previous article, we are hereby re-issuing the article with further explanations added to it Almost everyone of us who believes in the presence of God must believe that God is Omnipotent and Omnipresent and that nothing can ever prevent His presence. But even though almost everyone of us does agree on this, a further study on the subject through the various sciences in combination with logics may lead us to one unique conclusion.
Creationists all over the world say that all the contents of the universe are the creation of God. This implies that every single habit of nature or law of nature must have come from Him. Now, when man endeavors to make a study of all the contents of the universe, including their various habits, and documents all his findings systematically and mould a variety of sciences from them, then any attempt to study these sciences must certainly mean an attempt to get to know His creation. Naturally misassumptions and misinterpretations do occur sometimes, but we never stop revising it. Regardless of whether what has been documented is compatible or not with what exists in reality, the very fact that we have tried to study the creation of our Creator is itself an indication of our attempt to know more about it, which further implies that we do appreciate all His creation. It is thus through our acquaintance with the contents of the universe that we hope to be able to know the Creator better. Let us view the presence of God from a different perspective through science.
With the infinite nature of God, there are not any empty spaces and any matter in this Universe that can restrict the presence of God. He is present in anything and anywhere in this Universe. If God is the All Powerful and if nothing can ever prevent His presence, God must then be certainly present in every empty space in this universe. By implication, He is present even in the empty space between us; **He is present in the empty space inside objects; He is present in the empty space between the molecules of objects; and He is present in the empty space between atoms. Inside the atoms themselves, between the nuclei and the electrons that revolve around them, there must be innumerable empty spaces, which in no sense can ever prevent the presence of God. Sub atomic particles such as electrons, *neutrons, *protons, etc. can show their characteristics only if they are present in an empty space. And even there God is present. Verily then, as already implied earlier, absolutely nothing—not even atom parts—can restrict the presence of God. And absolutely nothing in this universe can ever exist in total isolation either, not even one percent of it, because such total isolation would certainly mean hindering the presence of God Thus it becomes obvious that whatever is existent in the universe, all this must naturally exist completely within the very existence of God, within His power. ***In other words, all existence must absolutely be part of God. The fact that we are part of God, however, does not mean that we are God. Our hair is not our selves, is it? It is thus clear that the sub-atomic particles are also part of God.
It is from these sub-atomic particles that the contents of the universe, including human beings, have evolved. All of us exist in The Absolute Unity, regardless of whether the universe is an independent entity with its own exclusive status, or whether it is a creation of God. All is but just parts of God that together form this universe. To ask questions about the shape of God would just be of no avail, because no one has the ability to imagine what He looks like. How can one imagine what God looks like when one in inside Him? Is it not true that our senses too have their limitations? However, by being aware that we are all made from the same basic material, and are together in one Absolute unity, we are certainly expected to be able to act wiser in coping with the various differences human being have. This, hopefully, will further lead us together towards worshipping the One and Only God.
Realizing that the whole universe is but a blessing that God bestows upon the human kind, the creationists in general, therefore, acknowledges that it is quite natural if man should attempt to study, take advantage of, and preserve it. They believe that only through the study of the contents of the universe as “the fruits of the work of God” can man get to know Him better. We learn a lot about the personality of an artist by studying the results of his work, do we not? So, what is wrong with trying to get to know our Creator the same way?
We human beings should feel very grateful, because despite the fact that we can perceive only a tiny part of the existence of God (within and around ourselves), we are still able to see, hear, feel, touch and smell it. And what’s more, after we die later, we shall be with God forever. Isn’t this what the law of mass and energy conservation is all about? Nothing ever increases in this universe, and nothing ever diminishes either from this universe.
Because the universe, as we have already stated above, is but one part of God, it then goes without saying that its ability to be exist in “nothingness” can be attributed to the presence of an “Absolute Power” that is capable of preserving existence and blanketing the whole content of the universe. Perhaps, this is why God is also referred to by, among others, “The All Preserver.”
There is indeed very little that we could conceive about God’s greatness, but then even this what little knowledge we have of Him is already a blessing of great magnitude for us. Given all this, man has indeed been wise enough as to be so cautious in his attempt to describe God, to the extent that none has virtually ever dare to draw the image of God, who none of us knows. This is plausible indeed, because whatever description man may make of God, it is highly likely that the God he describes will resemble a human being. Is it not a fact that, since ancient times, whenever man endeavours to draw pictures of those powerful illusory creatures, he is likely to make them look like not only man but also some other mighty, frightening animals? Thus, attempts to describe God in such a way will naturally imply that we are demoting God to the rank of those illusory creatures. Worse still, we shall be led to develop misconceptions of our God.
---------
* To ease understanding we are still using the obsolete theory for sub-atomic articles. In the new thoery, Leptons and Quarks are said to be sub-atomic particles.
** “If He is present in everything,” the skeptics may perhaps wonder, “does this not mean that He must also be present in the “dirtiest” of things? Such a question is apt to give us the impression that God, as they perceive it, resembles the genie, which is often portrayed in fairy tales as being able to enter into a bottle or an object. It sounds like they are indirectly belittling the existence and status of God, because by launching such a question they are apparently implying that God is comparable to the genie. Terms such as “clean” and “dirty” are but mere subjective man-made assumptions. Do you realise that, when viewed under a microscope, even “faeces” show signs of life, so beautiful and so magnificent within them? Monocellulars, so many of them and so colorful, live there in togetherness. It is only because some of these creatures are engaged in a kind of chemical process, causing them to emit gases very much disliked by man, that we have looked upon faeces as something very disgusting. But who then is it that has brought this faecal life into existence and preserved it?
***Contrary to what some may think, the claim that sub-atomic particles are parts of God is definitely not an implication that the creationists have been mistaken about their assumptions. To the people of those days, the creations of God were just anything that they could see, hear, smell, feel, and taste. Have we not often heard people saying that it is God who creates the earth, the sky and the whole content of the universe, including men, animals, and plants? Thus, it is absolutely appropriate then to say that the whole content of the universe has originated from those parts of God today known as sub-atomic particles. This is perhaps what those creationists of both the past and the present have meant. Anyway, sub-atomic particles were, in those days, just unknown to man yet, were they?
Should some insist that God creates not only the shapes but also the “basic material,” they must have the following logic in what they held: If God creates not only the shapes but also the “basic material” of this universe, there must then exist “two entities.” One is “the creator” and the other is “the creation.” As such, even though the creation is under the control of the Creator, it must still have its own power. And even if that power of the creation may be as little as one percent, this will still mean that one percent of the creation is beyond the control of the Creator, an implication that God’s power is being restricted by that one percent. To put it another way, the omnipotence of God is thus subject to some restriction. This simply does not make sense! Nothing can ever restrict the power of God. The whole content of the universe is absolutely under God’s rule. This being so, the whole content of the universe must absolutely be part of God. In other words, God has created all forms of existence in this universe from God’s parts. Or we human beings and the rest of the contents of the universe are created by God from God’s parts.
Reinarto Hadipriono
Reinarto (at) Hadipriono.com
Quoted from: www.deceptivememory.com and
www.the-absolute-enormous-unity.com
Bio: http://www.the-absolute-enormous-unity.com/02-about_the_writer.htm
Mailing address: Lemahwungkuk 37, Cirebon - Indonesia. Fax 62 231 207569, Phone 62-231-206980
|
Comments
|
Border Between Life And Death |
by Reinarto Hadipriono
Reinarto (nospam) Hadipriono.com (verified) |
Current rating: 0
22 Jun 2003
|
Border between Life and Death
The two words, life and death, are normally used only for living beings, not for objects, as the latter are normally considered lifeless. In biology, we can say something is alive when it has vital signs of life. First, it should have a certain form, size and structure. Second, it has vital activities, such as taking in food (air and nutrients) and circulating it throughout the body. It should also be able to process the food, and excrete substances that the body does not need any more. There should be processes that control all vital activities, growing, regenerating, and adjusting to the surroundings. Death means that the vital processes or activities have stopped.
Let us observe the two conditions and their differences. Sometimes we find that a plant or dried branch does not show any of these vital signs of life. It is as if it is dry because it does not get enough nutrients from the soil. However, if we give it enough water and fertilizer, it will come to life again. Of course, this can happen only if conditions both internal and external to it enable it to continue living. Thus, the condition in the first instance is (from the layman’s view) called “dead”, while the latter condition is called “alive”.
Some of us have kept insisting that men are creatures having superior status in this universe. They simply do not want to equate themselves with inanimate objects. Consequently, they posit that the non-living are made up of inorganic matter, whereas the living are made up of organic matter. Such a classification is indeed reasonable in that the various combinations of similar basic materials can indeed result in the emergence of objects which, according to the human perception, are different from each other. The fact, however, is that no matter how much men try to draw a distinction between these objects, the whole content of the universe has always been made up of the same basic material, that is, sub-atomic particles, which in the old theory are called electrons, neutrons, protons, or leptons and quarks as they are named in the new theory.
By acknowledging that man and the rest of the contents of the universe are made up of the same basic material, human beings may have a clearer vision of the relationship between man, animals, plants, and inanimate objects.
1. Let’s consider some of the physical features that man and animals have in common, apart from the basic material that forms their bodies.
• The first common feature lies in their life processes themselves. Both man and animals obviously undergo similar life processes.
• The second common feature, a very conspicuous one, lies in their symmetrical body shapes. Symmetrical here means that when a man standing upright on a piece of horizontal board is cut through with an imaginary plane right from the middle of his head straight down until the plane meets the board at right angle, we will have two relatively congruent parts of him. The left part and the right part are relatively similar to each other. The same thing holds for almost all mobile creatures.
• The third common feature lies in the functions of their bodies and their cellular tissues such as their eyes, ears, noses, mouths, brains, lungs, hearts, intestines, etc.
With the addition of these three commonalities, it is now high time that man realizes how close the relation between human beings and animals is.
2. How close the relation between animals and plants is and how obscure the borderline that separates them is can also be seen in a bacterium, which, while it resembles an animal, can yet be classified as a plant. This is particularly true of those bacteria having chlorophyll, which consequently makes their classification even more confusing.
3. And as it turns out, the viruses that we have in this world of ours can be classified as animals too, because their bodies contain protein; on the other hand, however, they are manifestly crystals by appearance, very much alike inanimate objects. Thus, it is evident how close the relation is between animals and inanimate objects and how obscure the border that separates them is.
Upon digesting all these, it becomes clear then how obscure the borderline that separates living creatures from inanimate objects is. However, if the presence of the life process is considered to be one of the exclusive characteristics of living creatures, what then are we to say about seeds, objects commonly regarded as being inactive or dormant? Is it not evident enough they are all void of the life process? How about those monocellulars—creatures that still exist till today and which, since their very existence billions of years ago, have kept increasing their numbers by splitting themselves up and have since then never experienced death? Does it ever occur to you that in those monocellulars “that have survived till today” the life process has virtually never come to a stop since the very beginning of their existence? What they have been experiencing is only a process of evolution for billions of years. These are naturally creatures with the longest life span in the world. This is proof enough that there may be other variations of life which are much different from the one we experience. On the other hand, however, man—despite the fact that the human offspring originate from sperms and ova—has always been proclaimed dead once his life process stops.
What all this implies is that the obscurity of the dividing line between the living and the dead is attributable to three things: virus, seeds, and monocellulars.
It is only by man’s initiatives that the different combinations of matter acquire their respective names and meanings, and are later classified accordingly on the basis of man’s assumptions. Thus, we have such terms as animate objects and inanimate objects, all of which are but just man-made classification based on his interpretation of nature. Now that you are aware that all the contents of the universe are made up of the same basic material, that is sub-atomic particles, which combines to form atoms, in which there are energy and extremely fast continuous movements, what have you to say about all these? Because of the obscurity of the line separating the living from the dead, is it not possible for us to claim that there is “life” in atoms? Those who look down on these creations of God will, however, find it difficult to accept this.
Reinarto Hadipriono
Reinarto (at) Hadipriono.com
Quoted from: www.deceptivememory.com and
www.the-absolute-enormous-unity.com
Bio: http://www.the-absolute-enormous-unity.com/02-about_the_writer.htm
Mailing address: Lemahwungkuk 37, Cirebon - Indonesia. Fax 62 231 207569, Phone 62-231-206980
|
|
