We as a people have evolved a great deal through the ages I am not referring to evolutionary change (biological) I am referring to intellectual change we have through the ages developed a more keen sense of knowledge. Not meaning we are more intelligent than previous generations but rather more informed by the means of inquiring knowledge than our ancestors were, today with television and personal computers at our command we have the world with its abundance of knowledge only a click away.
Surely the great minds of yesterday such as Aristotle, (who lived from 384 BC to 322 BC) Plato, Socrates just to mention a few of the truly gifted intellectuals of their day, yes these great minds helped write history as we know it today with their works.
Plato (left) Aristotle (right)
They laid down the foundation for physics, biology, philosophy and the scientific method. Yes, these explorers of knowledge paved the way for our modern day giants of intellectualism.
Imagine being born before Christ (BC) I am a believer in Jesus although I do not agree with all the teachings of the Bible however Jesus' father (God) I've tried to visualize him as an entity i.e. what kind of being physical or spiritual is he composed of. I know the Bible states God created man in the image of himself nevertheless I find it hard to picture God as having a physical make-up.
Aristotle's thoughts on God are similar to mind:
Through the ages, most Western scholars have viewed Aristotle's concept of God and the soul rather disparagingly. For Aristotle, they say, God is the distant and uninvolved Prime Mover and the soul is simply a property of something that is alive, and therefore it is as mundane and of no more consequence than a biological property of the living being.
Aristotle's concept has nothing in common with the immortal soul of man as envisioned by the three monotheistic religions, which share the same roots in the Bible. It has been convenient for Western scholars, even those of agnostic or atheistic bent, to keep Aristotle's concept of God and soul out of the picture, so to speak, because of course and this whether one believes in the biblical God and soul, or does not the biblical model is the one and only genuine transcendental model of God and the human soul that one is supposed to recognize as such. Any other philosophy about God and the disposition of the human soul is paganistic and therefore unworthy of serious consideration. This narrow-mindedness, this tunnel vision, has prevailed through the centuries to our day, much to the detriment of Western thought.
Aristotle
The consensus view of Aristotle's understanding of God is stated very well by Frederick Copleston in A History of Philosophy, Vol. I:
The First Mover, being immaterial, cannot perform any bodily action: His action must be purely spiritual, and so intellectual. In other words, God's activity is one of thought. But what is
the object of His thought? Knowledge is intellectual participation of the object: now, God's object must be the best of all possible objects, and in any case, the knowledge enjoyed by God cannot be knowledge that involves change or sensation or novelty. God therefore knows himself in an eternal act of intuition or self-consciousness. Aristotle, then, defines God as "Thought of Thought." God is subsistent thought, which eternally thinks itself.
How this theory of God relates to my own conception of God is I do not believe God is an omnipotent being with a physical make-up such as we humans. I believe him to be an intelligence without a physical or spiritual body. Scientifically speaking God may be the sun in our solar system the creator of Earth an intelligence, an all knowing, all loving being that lives through thought.
Of course, my theory cannot be proven by mortal man and that is exactly what it is, a theory. I may be wrong an I am open to other theories on how God is perceived or just who he is and how he exists.
"Science without religion is lame Religion without science is blind" Albert Einstein
Very interesting article, David. It provided information I did not know. You also have an interesting theory. I do not feel God can accurately be described by man. Similes and metaphors were used to describe in in the Holy Bible (and I know your position on the Bible.) He's like...He's many things to different people and nothing so some.
He is. "I Am that I Am." And I'm okay with accepting by faith that He simply Is. He's All That and then some. I marvel at and like that mere mortals cannot intellectualize God accurately. I like that He's the topic of discussion and the most controversial topic of all times. Who He is to me is an indication to me when others change Him. I do not follow that crowd. He changes not!
Such an interesting topic, David. I respect your theory and you.
Oh I know, David, even your title says this is just a theory. I also think you're wise to view life from all angles. That doesn't mean you accept and believe everything you come across.
So many people through my lifetime have told me "You'll have all the answers when you die" But while we're alive it's something to dwell on anyway. thanks for commenting
I love the theory, and this was very informative, and David, you never cease to amaze me how you write, and articulate what you are trying to say...I believe that God, Is "The Almighty Omnipotent", He is all that he is...If we were talking about his son Jesus, I have my own thoughts as to how he may have looked. But God....He is what he is. Wow, this is deep.....Great article tho, and I enjoyed the read....Your fan, and friend in pen......Gary
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
tweet this!
