The most common view is that God made the universe and lives in it.. The idea that everything is literally in him is intersting. So is this universe his brain or something?
God does share attributes with the Cosmos
2006-08-11 23:52:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cyber 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pantheism: Can God be the Cosmos?
Can the cosmos be a diety? (When I say cosmos, i mean the universe as a whole, but I don't mean that every invidivual person or thing is a god.
2006-08-11 23:56:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by tariq k 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can worship the cosmos as a deity if you like. Personally I don't see the point. Are you asking if the universe feels or experiences something? It probably doesn't. Not the way we do. Our experience as living beings has been shaped by countless years of evolution. But the universe is quite complex and signals are definately travelling throughout it.
Personally I don't think there is a strikingly large difference between pantheism and, say, Judeo-Christian belief systems. An omnipresent but intangible god with control over the physical world, for an example of a possible Christian belief structure, is essentially the same as 'the cosmos as god'. The difference is merely emphasis on the abstract and "elsewhere" nature of "God". "God" is purported to be "outside" of the cosmos, 'cosmos' meaning that which we can make sense of. It works fine as a Zen koan. However, it is nonsense from the point of view of a human trying to understand the world. While it is certainly possible to design a logically consistent scenario that includes such a god, there are an infinity of such logically consistent but extremely unlikely "outsides" to our universe, including universes with other "God"s outside of them, or ones with multiple gods, or universes that popped out of special gigantic toasters, or universes that existed due to unavoidable paradoxes and scheduling conflicts, or universes that actually didn't really exist but still had several inhabitants that thought that they did. Pick a worldview that stands out from the rest. Actually, don't worry about it. It doesn't matter. People matter. Worry about people.
2006-08-12 00:20:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the cosmos is godly, divine.
I don't think you could say it was "a" diety, since the cosmos is unending in space ("there is no outside" or "there is only outsides; all insides are made through limitation"), and without beginning or end in time (why should time begin? - why should it end? beginnings and endings seems to be the product of a limited point of view, in an existence with far too much occupation devoted to age and aging :). If you individualize the cosmos, you pin it down, limit it, and make it into an entity (in your mind, for your mind). This makes it less divine, IMPOV.
According to the theosophist doctrine, among others, our brief existence incarnated on the planet Earth, is a time spent living in the grosser tissues of the diety's physical body. Even our souls and our higher spiritual selves are just part of the higher etheric planes of the cosmic physical plane. In other word, there are layer after layer of divine revelation awaiting each and everyone of us, in due time, as we evolve past our own limitations and become sensitive to impressions from so-far hidden sides of the diety.
Ups, yes, I wrote "the diety", but I meant that in a local way, if this solar system can be considered "local".
2006-08-12 00:53:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by wereduck 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
When you say Cosmos / Universe as a whole is God, then where are the contents of that Universe you are leaving behind, whether on a different milkyway or another Galaxy.
It is actually Universe including all nature ( every thing included) is part of GOD and its creativity. That is why death penalty to a person is wrong as he/she has also got GOD in him/herself.
2006-08-12 00:00:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mani G.India 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
What you call the cosmos is a simple projection of mind. Everything in physical terms is a projection, as the images on a movie screen. In this sense, "we" are the projector, making images and calling the images, "Life".
The reality that is "God" is All That Is. The cosmos is not a deity, but it is formed by our use of the Mind of God. In a manner of speaking, you are God, asking about God; you ask, because you dream that you are separate from God...having said that, you are not God, yet God is everything that you are beneath your dreams of being separate from "Him", and the world at large.
Individuality is our way of convincing ourselves that we can be apart from our Creator, all the while remaining eternally one with "Him".
2006-08-12 02:51:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Sky in the Grass 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
If god is "all," "each and every thing," "nature" or "the universe," why provide it an added label? Why no longer purely say "i've got self belief interior the universe" or "i've got self belief in nature?" the greater suitable label of god is incomprehensible in that context. I spent some month as a pantheist and this substitute into the question I struggled to respond to the main. interior the top, i might desire to locate no reason to rational reason to grant the greater suitable call of "god" to nature. From a thoroughly rational point of view, announcing that the universe itself is god makes the god's life irresolvable because we've not got any way of sorting out certainly one of these declare. i'm open to the thought the finished universe might desire to be god, yet, back, what could be the element of keeping something as genuine with none rational reason to hold it as genuine?
2016-11-04 10:28:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a question that asks us to try and separate the "physical" from the abstract "spiritual".
My view is that the cosmos is physical, but it is indeed a holographic 'facet' of it's Creator.
2006-08-12 00:00:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by The Garden of Fragile Egos 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wouldn't living inside God be a weird experience? We'd be like tapeworms.
2006-08-11 23:49:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by drink_more_powerade 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I consider that a lot more likely than there being a personal god.
2006-08-11 23:51:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by laetusatheos 6
·
0⤊
0⤋