This thought occurred to me around 3:00 a.m., as I had gotten up in the middle of the night, suffering,* and decided to read a paragraph or two in Secret of the Universe (1932) [once reprinted as “Trinity in the Universe”] by Nathan R. Wood, President, Gordon College of Theology, Boston, Massachusetts, 223pp., pb., 14.00 + P&H, which I reprinted a decade or so ago. After I went back to bed, got a little sleep, and then trudged through the rest of the day, I actually had forgotten all about those thoughts that had possessed my mind for about 15 minutes, until now, about 17 hours later... and it lingered in my mind like a déjà vu reminiscence, and I knew there was something that I forgot to remember (like when you come to the stark realization, out of the blue, that there is something important that you forgot and the awareness that you had forgotten “something” forces its way upon you like a home invader)... and it took a moment or two, to materialize, and I remembered what it was; and I am glad it did force its way back upon me; that God reminded me.
[* —and sadly, I am now suffering again, as I write this out. Unfortunately, it takes 12 times longer (about 3 hours) to write out all that I thought in a few flashes—such is the wonder of the brain and mind that God gave to us His people (and it will take another 3 hours to refine it several times). However, in the midst of suffering, sublimation through focusing on God and His Glory, is the best catharsis, until relief comes.]
I will first quote from the book, make a few minor comments, and then get to the heart of my thoughts:
“How Does Power Come to Be a Physical Universe?
“But how does the outspread Creative power whose dimensions are space pass into a world of matter or motion? How do we get a physical universe? God’s power is surely first of all spiritual. God is a spirit.* How does Divine power become physical? How does it pass into a tangible universe? That is one of the great questions of thought.
[* This statement is an error, an error of one tiny word, which I shall discuss later. Note Mine. R.A.B.]
“But the answer is clear. God’s power is not only power to think but power to move. Can spirit move in a spatial way? Surely. Your mind is spirit, and it can leap across the sea, and pass to planets and stars.* So, surely, Creative power can move. But, as power to move, that outspread Divine power becomes energy, which is the power of physical motion. And this energy not only can move, but, as we know, does move. It becomes motion, everywhere, which manifests itself in all the phenomena of matter. It becomes a tangible universe, which we can feel, and see, and hear.
[* This is a slight error in that it does not explain the difference between man’s spirit and thought, and God’s. Though there is similarity by design, it is similar to the relation between a mere 2-foot in circumference, plastic model of the universe of our planets—and the “real thing”. But he is thinking in the right direction. God’s Omnipresence actually may be an expression of His Omniscience. While our thought may end, the mere unfulfilled titilation of entertainment or scientific / philosophical, theological inquiry that evaporates like a mist of steam out of a whistling teapot, God’s “Thinking” is reality; and it is never thwarted, unfulfilled, or stifled in any way to any degree. God’s “Thinking” is Being; and God has no wasted, random, or bad thoughts. In reality, God does not “think”, because He has no Brain (being incorporeal), and being Spirit, He “has” no Mind—He IS Pure and Ultimate Thought. You and I need can only think of a few things at the same time, and then, in a linear progression from start to finish. However, God’s “Thought” or “Thinking” entails all truth and all reality in all that exists to every “corner” of the universe (inward to the micro-universe, outward to the macro-universe—and in all other dimensions that may exist of which we are utterly ignorant). God does not think linearly, but as a massive collage of all Truth. He does not need to “think” for He KNOWS. He IS Truth. Thus, many words in Scripture, such as God’s Arm, Hand, or Mind (or Thinking, Thoughts) are anthropopathisms: that is, God speaking of Himself, in human terms, “as if” He were a human, so that we can, to some limited extent, relate to His Ineffable Being. God’s Omnipresence may also be an indicator that the entire universe exists within Him; that He pervades all, and that He is everywhere, so all is in Him. Indeed, Scripture tells us, “For in Him we live, and move, and have our being...” (Acts 17:28). This, in turn, may have given rise, once corrupted in the minds of His sinful people who defected from Truth, into panentheism. Note Mine. R.A.B.]
“The Reality of Space, Energy and Motion
“Space then is, not in some vague way, but logically and truly, the basis and beginning of the actual, tangible universe. It is not a framework, a location, of vast nothingness, in which in some way the universe is built. It is itself truly the basis and beginning of the physical universe. For this real and living space, which is the outspreading of Divine power into dimensions, is that by which such Divine power translates itself from spirit into energy and motion, and so into a physical universe of energy and motion.
“But people may hesitate. This is not the way in which one has always thought about space, if one has been able to think about or conceive space at all, either as physical nothingness or as mental unreality. This reality of space is however far more reasonable than the contrary and self-contradictory idea that space is nothingness, or a figment of the mind. It gives living reality to space and to the physical universe. And there is no reasonable objection to it. Can Divine power, we may ask, the power of God who is a Spirit, have dimensions? Surely. Omnipresence in a physical world must have dimensions.* To some, too, this vision of space as the outspreading of Divine power may seem a more religious view than they are willing to sanction. But such a view of space is hardly unfitting in a theistic universe, a universe with God in it, the only sane universe to a sane mind. And it may be well to bring to mind how surprisingly this view of space fits in with the modern view of the physical universe as a universe of infinite activity, whose realities are not things or forms, but energy and motion. For nothing is inactive in the universe as we now know it—not even space!
[* This is a logical error. It is predicated upon the assumption that we fully understand God and it assumes facts not in evidence: that is, facts that God has not revealed in His Word. It also seems to be getting the cart before the horse, in assuming that God is bound by the Natural Laws (those Laws of Nature that He created) in our universe. It is as much an error thinking that “God must have dimension” because the universe has dimension, as in thinking that God must have anything in particular because man likewise, has those qualities or particular things. God is not defined by His Creation, but vice versa. While God may design His “Fingerprints” into Creation, that does not mean that God is limited to being as His Creation is (in either nature or in degree), in those parallels, any more than He is limited to thinking or being as man is.
Note also: I only read to the above paragraph in Wood’s book, which thoughts sparked my own activity; and all notes that I have added to Wood’s work, is now on “Day 2”, as I go back and refine, for the second time, what I wrote yesterday. However, I include the below partial paragraph from the same page, because it does touch upon some things that I have already written in the subsequent, and main portion of my Rumination (article). Notes Mine. R.A.B.]
“How Modern Discovery Leads to This Reality
“For this conception of space as the outspreading of Creative power, which passes, through energy and motion, into a physical universe, is remarkably confirmed by the general view of scientists to-day that matter is essentially one of the forms which energy assumes. Energy may take the form of light, of heat, of sound, of electric currents, of moving bodies, of any radiation, of strains. In all of these it is still energy. We can make it as solid as we will. Still it is one of the forms of energy...” (pp.126-127)
So, the question, as I frame it, is:
How can an immaterial God who is Spirit create a material universe?
I believe the problem (in man’s mind) is a conceptual problem. Man is egocentric (oftentimes, not too altogether different in thinking from a 5-year-old). He imagines himself to be the sum of all things and the center of his own universe. He interprets all that he sees based upon his egocentrism (including his false perceptions) and irrationally expects the universe to conform to his own notions of it, and in accordance to his perception of his own being.
This is the problem with our current question.
As the age-old atheistic / agnostic smug (and ignorant), pseudo-philosophical, terminally ended, presumably rhetorical question goes:
“If God can do anything, can He create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?”
The question itself is not the problem. Questions are the start of true inquiry. However, this question is most often posed, not as inquiry, not as a starting point for philosophical (logical) theological intercourse, but it is thrown out as if it were 5-gallons of water on a small campfire. It is tossed out as if it were the last word to end discussion.
The answer to the question, of course, is:
“God is not obligated to enter man’s irrational delusions.”
Even as German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) expressed (if I remember his mantra correctly, from my reading his lectures 40 years ago, which were published in the book titled, What Is Called Thinking?):
“The most thought-provoking thing in our thought-provoking world is that we are still not thinking.”
However, that was Heidegger’s problem too. Clearly he did not read any of the extant works of Dr. Gordon H. Clark (1902-1985) before Heidegger gave his lectures on thinking. As I have expressed, “If a person has not seriously read the three or so dozen works of Dr. Clark, he has not truly thought—or at least, he has not thought truly”.
[I stock all of Clark’s works (inquire). A day without Clark (the greatest philosopher and theologian of our era—and possibly of all time) is like a day without thinking.]
So, egocentric man (who is still not thinking, at least, not truly; what thinking is meant to be—thinking valid thoughts, true thoughts, not mindless fantasy or bloated opinion) does not understand God—and refuses to accept God’s Own Word in the matter. Surely sinful, finite, damaged-minded man understands God better than God understands Himself... right? Hardly. That is the problem with man—most “Christians” included. They expect God to conform not only to their feeble, skewed, unholy notions, but also to conform to what modern society deems to be “appropriate”, “fair”, “moral”, etc. They expect the Immutable, Perfect God to change and become imperfect as man imagines Him to be, or imagines that He should be. Of course, because their minds, their souls are sin-damaged, and because they are still not thinking, they don’t view it like that (that is, they do not consciously realize that they actually expect God to conform to them—that they subconsciouly believe that they have created God after their own image); again, because they are ego-centric and sinful. This is not merely a problem of ego-centrism, but also of double mindedness / hypocrisy, on many levels.*
[* Most “Christians”, who do err, not knowing the Scriptures, claim that Jesus abolished God’s Law—ignoring Christ’s very words on the matter; and thus they misinterpret the rest of the New Testament, also based upon other false presuppositions. Furthermore, were any of those individual humans himself “God”—none would take such an egalitarian, progressive, lax view of his puny creation thinking that He (“God”) must conform to the confused notions of His puny creatures.]
So, then, it seems that first of all, the question,
How can an immaterial God who is Spirit create a material universe?
must be analyzed, to discover its flaw. Yes, the question itself is flawed; based upon false presuppositions.
The issue seems to be that confused man, not understanding GOD, imagines God being immaterial—that He is a “mere” Spirit—is a limitation, a handicap for God. “Oh, poor God! He has no body. All He can do is float around—and hope that He does not dissipate into nothingness, being little more than helpless ether!” Man needs to be rebuked, as Christ mildly rebuffed the Brothers Boanerges, “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of”—and not knowing of what nature they themselves were, they knew not the Nature of God, either. That is modern man’s problem too.
They focus (in nearly blind tunnel vision, with the entire periphery blurred and even blackened out) on God being a Spirit — (in their confused minds) a mere ghost or merely a “good (but mostly ineffectual, impotent) influence”; and because they know not what that Spirit is, they know not what that Spirit can do; nor can they imagine how He can do it. Their problem is that they are still not thinking—or as Paul expressed it, they are “ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth”. The “hard drive” of sinful man’s mind is “full” and there is (because of man’s stubbornness) no room for any more “data”—and man arrogantly thinks that he already has all the data that he needs; and therefore, he rejects the very Word of God, instead to believe in man’s own perverse notions.
[My uncle asked me 30 years ago, concerning my opinion of a question that puzzled him: Why there were not new books of the Bible being written today. I thought for a brief moment and replied: Despite the Bible having been a best-selling book every year for centuries, the majority of “Christians” don’t read what we have; those who do read generally don’t understand what they read; and the majority of those who do understand don’t obey what God commanded in what they read. Why would He give us more? The problem, like that of faith, is not a matter of quantity, but of us simply using what we have been given by God.]
The problem is man not understanding God or what God’s Nature of being “Spirit” is. Some translations misrepresent the verse (John 4:24)—as did Nathan Wood—and improperly translate that God is “a” Spirit. This is untrue. God is not anything on par with anything else (that is, with any created entity) that has “a spirit”. God is SPIRIT—Pure, Perfect, Ultimate Spirit. Possibly—Pure, Perfect, Ultimate Energy. Now, if man viewed God as being Pure, Perfect, Ultimate Energy (and any person who does not appreciate that could be brought into closer proximity to a high-voltage generator, and once all the hair on his body immediately stood up in respect, in awe, stood at attention before his superior—though no command was given), he might begin to realize that God is not merely a ghost or water vapour, and that such Pure Energy has no limitation, but is Omnipotent. But God is not mere impersonal energy, static, kinetic, or in a state of flux. He is Ultimate Willful, Immutable Being—Ultimate Omniscient, Ultimate Omnipotent Energy.
In reality, those of us trapped in a physical universe are the ones with the handicap. In reality, the entire universe, everything that exists that is external to God (that is, everything that is not God Himself) is (in a sense) the “make believe” world—for it all exists by, through, in, and as a result of the Thought of God. It is God’s “make believe”—but His “make believe” is reality at His complete control. Man deludedly thinks that he is in control of his own life and destiny (and that this life is all that there is)—but God chooses even their delusions (Isaiah 66:4; II Thessalonians 2:11) and God controls even their will (Philippians 2:13). God orders the steps of a good [righteous] man (Psalm 37:23)—and those of the wicked as well. God is not a mere spectator in His Own Universe—He is Master of it. God’s Thinking is not passive, but active and deterministic. God is Immutable. Thoughts foreign to His Mind cannot force their way into it and change what He would have thought, any more than that which does not exist can bring itself into spontaneous existence. God is not a mere “mind reader”.
This solves part of the problem. But the question of how something immaterial, that is, an immaterial God can create something material is another matter. However, it again is a question conceived out of ignorance / misperception. When one is in nearly complete ignorance concerning a given entity (and if the majority of what one thinks that he knows is in error, but he does not realize this) then it is easy to understand how such a person cannot “understand” how that entity can do anything that it can do. Again, not understanding high-voltage electricity, or what it is, would preclude ones understanding what it could do. The problem seems to center around man expecting the immaterial / metaphysical world to conform to and be in subjection to the material world as he imperfectly understands it to be. In a very limited way of thinking, it would be like seeing a man in a private’s uniform, barking orders to lieutenants, majors, and brigadier generals, and being confused, thinking, “How can that private order those officers around...?” However, since the spectator does not have all the information, he does not realize that the “private” is actually a five-star general whose uniform was ruined by some accident, and having nothing else to wear, he is wearing the uniform of the only other person his size who had a spare uniform. Thus, based upon not having all the information, man is thinking backwards or inverted or skewed, into thinking that that which is immaterial cannot interact with, much less control, that which is material; and that the material is superior to the immaterial.
Now, we come to the third dilemma; but again, it is one of our own nonundestanding and misunderstanding, and not one of essence itself. It is true that in many areas one must have a paradigm in order to be able to frame ideas. If one is looking for something, he has to be looking for something in particular, in most cases; otherwise, he will never find what he does not know that he is looking for. Even if someone is problem-solving and looking for “something” that he knows not specifically, which he only will recognize one he sees it, for example, if he is looking for something that “will fit” or that can be used in a certain application (like looking for something that can be used to plug a leak in a boat, or a dike)—he still has a general paradigm of something in general. However, one must be willing (as a computer full of useless data) to jettison his own invalid ideas and incorporate, download, copy—espouse and adopt truth that God reveals. One then must be able to synthesize, arrange, make sense of that data, and incorporate it, coherently, properly, in with other truth that he does know. As I have long explained, God is Perfect and Immutable. He does not change His Mind, make mistakes, or contradict Himself. Thus, if between two (or more) passages of Scripture there “seems to be” a contradiction—there is not. It is a misreading. The reader is confused. The only valid interpretation is the one finds the harmony. This is what all problem solving is, in any area; whether in puzzles, games, or actual scientific inquiry. When one is confused he must focus on what he does know (in our present case, or in any interpretation of Scripture, that God is Perfect, True, Immutable) and as one focuses on that (instead of upon confusion and error) then that which is not properly understood, in time, with prayer and meditation on what is true, will become focused to sharp clarity.
Now, based upon what we know of science,* energy and matter are but different forms—or I propose, even different expressions—of the same “stuff”. Yes, stuff is such an ineloquent word for such an important concept; but it is the word that scientific “experts” have used for decades. I propose that a better word would be phenomena.
[* Most of what the “experts” believe to be true, believe to be scientific law, is not: for law does not change; it is constant; and therefore, they have only found approximations of law and have continued to miss the pulse, the bulls-eye, as they blindly stumble around it.]
To add to the mix even more confusion is the concept of anti-matter. In this term, anti- is not necessarily referring to “against” as much as “the inverse of” matter. Showing their confusion, the “experts” even refer to anti-matter as a material (or even matter) composed of anti-particles—but no; if it is anti-matter, it is not a “material” anything. Regardless, we shall ignore anti-matter (as it anti-ignores us), but it should be kept in the back of ones mind as “something” (or “anti-something”) upon which to ruminate.
Some theoretical physicists suggest that the majority of all that we know as matter is actually empty space.* The matter is actually the electrons in each atom that comprises all that exists in the material world. God often performed what man considers to be “miracles” (none of which were miracles to God) by operating supra our understanding, but within the laws of the material world. Christ, at times, passed through the midst of those evil persons who intended to kill Him before the appointed time, in violation of the appointed manner, or He passed through a wall or a roof (as He simply appeared in the Upper Room when all doors were locked)—because all matter / energy is in a state of flux (electrons spinning within the outer shells of atoms). Thus, if one could allign, 3-D, all electrons (matter), as passing two combs through each other without touching, or as shooting an arrow through the spokes of a moving bicycle wheel, then one can pass solid matter through other solid matter without any ruffled feathers.
[* And I may not agree with what Wood was expressing about space. It seems to me that space, without matter, does not exist, even as dimension without matter does not exist (if there were no matter, how could an “inch” exist?). Thus, it is not “empty space”, but nothingness. Space is a mental construct by which matter is understood. Regardless, for a fascinating book on these and similar topics, written on a level nonscientists can understand, of which book I stock very good used, copies (since it is out of print), see the very readable and very enjoyable: The Quantum Zoo: A Tourist’s Guide To the Never-Ending Universe, Marcus Chown, 216pp., Hb., 25.00 + P&H (and I may even have some paperback for 20.00 + P&H).]
Such theoretical physicists speculate* that if all the empty space in the entire universe were removed and all matter (electrons) were packed together without any space between them, all matter in the universe would fit in the size of a sugar cube. I must confess I have not tried this experiment (and that sugar cube would be a mite much for my cup of tea, and would be so heavy that I could not lift it into the tea cup—and I shudder to think what would happen when that sugar cube “dissolved”), but whether it is true or not is not the point. My main point is merely expressing, to some degree, that energy and matter are, as far as man understands, two forms or expressions of the same thing. This includes light; and scientists now claim that light contains two different elements, waves and photons. Regardless (again), man may be right, or he may be confused, possibly being close to the truth—possibly being far away from the truth, as he blindly continues his little scientific game of “Marco-Polo”,** using what limited senses and powers of cognition (not that he can trust either) that he has in the attempt to make sense of the universe in which he finds himself.
[* Of course, it needs to be underscored and highlighted—quite often their speculation or “professional guessing” is little different from (that is, no more true than) what they actually “claim” to be truth, such as nearly any element of their God-hating fairy tale of evolution.
** “Marco Polo”, of course, was an Italian explorer who travelled far from home, across the seas, to China. A children’s game, called Marco Polo, is conducted in a swimming pool. It is carried out by one person being chosen to be the “explorer”, who must upon his honor keep his eyes closed while searching in the pool for the other parties playing the game (since it is probably hard for most to keep their eyes closed, a pair of swimmer’s goggles painted over with black paint would be a good idea). The searcher periodically cries out “Marco” and everyone else in the pool, playing, must call out in reply, “Polo”. He must then use his powers of echo-location to find, and move toward the other players; however, those other players are allowed to move around; but he can also listen for their movement (or rapid breathing after having emerged from swimming under water, some distance to avoid detection, holding their breath), and he can also sense the shock waves in the water from their movement. The person first touched in the blind-man’s quest, becomes the next “explorer”. Ah... if life’s problems were only so simple, innocuous, and evanescent...!]
However, the point I have been attempting to establish, is that if this perception is true, that energy and matter are different forms / expressions of the same phenomena—then neither can this explain God. Though God is Energy—He is non-particle, non-material energy. God is Spirit. We do not truly or even partially know what that means.
[Scientists themselves seem to have a problem defining motion. I propose that motion “is the result of the displacement or rearrangement of energy and matter”.]
God gave us a spirit (that essence that survives the death of the body and through which children of Adam have God consciousness and familial relation to Him—and which spirit, it seems, is related to light; Adam and Eve having lost their clothing of light, when they sinned, and thus noticed that they, the children of light, of the Father of Light, were naked). While that spirit that we possess (or rather that possesses us; or rather that is the real “us”) serves as a very limited analogy to help us understand God—Pure Spirit—God is not a man. God’s Spirit is above ours, even as His Thoughts and Ways are astronomically higher than our own. However, there is some univocal point of relation, or the analogy, the symbolism, the purpose would be nonexistent and meaningless. However, the solution, again, is that we are to conform to Him; not attempt to force Him (in our tiny, damaged minds) to conform to our notions (of Him or of us or of the universe or any of its aspects).
The Hebrew word ruakh, and the Greek word pnyooma can be translated, “spirit”, but they can also be translated, “ghost” (not that we understand that word any better—and it certainly does not refer to superstitions, pagan notions, Hollywood movies, or cartoons) and it can also be translated, “breath” or “wind”. Even as Aristotle referred to his “Unmoveable Mover”, in his vain attempt to deduce God, so also, God is the “Unbreathed Breath” and the “Unblown Wind”—or more properly, the “Self-breathed Breath” and the “Self-blown Wind”.
God defies “defining” or “explaining” except to the limited extent that we understand and use the very words that He self-disclosed in His Word concerning His Being. God is not merely “totally other”—He is totally beyond! that is, He is Ineffable: completely beyond our comprehension, except to the very limited degree that He self-disclosed and to the degree that He enlightens our minds to understand and administers to us faith to believe His self-revelation.
So, God is immaterial, Pure, Perfect, Immutable, Self-Willed, Omnipotent Energy Being. Matter causes drag. Drag slows things down due to friction (the bumping of matter into other tiny particles of matter, even on a microscopic level, such as micro dust or humidity, even the gases that comprise what we know as “air”). God is unhindered by all of that. God is Pure Light—electronless Light (Energy). Is it any wonder that the Theory of Relativity says that nothing can approach (let alone surpass) the speed of light (other than light itself); and anything that attempts to approach the speed of light (671,000,000 mph / 983,571,056 fps) experiences the shrinking of matter and the slowing down of time to prevent its approaching the speed of light...? This is God’s “governor” placed on the engine of all speed in the universe to keep man in mind of his limitations and inability to approach unto God, or become godlike. No man approaches God except by His invitation (Psalm 65:4). In fact, if natural light (that is, light in the natural, or material world that God created) is comprised of energy and matter—it is dirty light, tainted with matter.
Ironically, often many untruths have their roots in the truth, but the subsequent “growth” (development of thought) took place in the wrong direction (or they built the wrong structure upon a semi-true foundation). Thus, Platonism, Gnosticism, Buddhism, Dualism, to one degree or another, and all other false philosophies and false religions have their roots in truth, that to some degree, that which is material (under Post-Edenic-Fall conditions) is evil, and that which is spirit is good. But even then the ancients and pagans err when they do not even know the meaning of “good” (defined only by God), and when they do not realize that there are some spirits that are evil (though not independent of God’ Sovereignty / Determinism).
Thus, since God is SPIRIT, and immaterial—Pure, Divine Light is without electrons or any matter, and thus is faster (being limited solely by God’s Own Will concerning His Own Immutable Nature*) than natural light in the material world, being unaffected by anything in the material world, being impervious to friction and drag. God is not “a drag”—man is...! God is not merely as fast as the speed of Light. He is Light, and He is everywhere (even if He chooses that His Light not be displayed, that is, even if that Light it is not discernible to humans) and if God wanted to “move” (since He is everywhere, to where would He go?) He would travel at the Speed of Thought—and His Thinking is not a “process” but an immediate reality. He would travel at the speed of being.
[* Decades ago I wrote, “God’s Being and Ability to be is not limited by sinful man’s inability to understand God’s Being or Ability to be.” The common rendering of the Sacred Name Yahweh as, “I am that I am” sounds a bit fatalistic; resigning to fate; passive rather than active. That is a false perception. An emphatic inferred paraphrase would be, “I am always as I will—never changing”. Sadly, too many, “Christians” who do not understand God’s Nature, rejecting His Word in the matter (instead believing their own ideas—superstitions, myths) subconsciously must think that Yahweh means, “I ain’t what I was”, if they think that God ever “changed” and is now “different”: the “new, improved” God of the New Testament, Who is a “much-nicer Guy”, now that He is on His meds and has taken anger-management courses and senstitivity training and has conformed to modern notions of sinful man concerning what is “fair”. Sinful man’s thoughts of God are blasphemous.]
So, God Himself is not limited by being “mere” Spirit. In reality, God limited man and the physical world by making them material. God is unfettered, unrestricted (except by His Own Perfect, Immutable Nature, which is His being True), by being Pure Spirit / Energy / Light.
The real question, therefore, is not how an immaterial God could create a material world (and such people who so wonder have watched too many ghost movies, creations of tiny godless minds) but why He would do so.
Of course, He did so for His Own Glory—which is what all of creation is about. Those who refuse it Him to Whom it all is due, are not of God and do not understand a stitch in time of the tapestry of that which we know as “life”—which is not really life, but a “qualifying run” and establishment for “pole position” in the real race of life (which will commence after the Millennial Kingdom), all of which have been determined in every possible way by the Mind and Will of God: Who is Perfect Spirit (Perfect Being).
For the same reason (that God is Pure nonmaterial Energy) man cannot, of his own ability “discover” and lay Him bare for all to see (despite the lying Khrushchev’s putting words in Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin’s mouth, in saying while in outer space, “I don’t see God anywhere out here”); nor can man understand God except to the limited extent that God self-discloses and grants grace to understand and believe.
[If anything that I have written is true or of value, it is my hope and prayer that one day my works might grow to become even underappreciated—for that would be a marked improvement to the current state! Clark is concise and brief—but deep. I am verbose (painting a verbal picture), but more assimilable to the average reader (and I cover some different topics, with the same Reformed thread). The solution: Read us both; and in reading, understand. Christendom is not about to fall because God is happy with us! True Christianity is doctrine; anything less is humanism. True religion, theology centers around God, not man. All of our problems are the result of turning from the true faith, to embrace what pleases man / the world—and that makes one the enemy of God. Morality never changes. It was established each time God commaned, “Thou shalt not” and “This shalt thou do”. God established the difference between good and evil and the two never switch roles, nor join together. God will not compromise. It is our duty to return to Him according to all that He revealed; to the truth faith. Without repentance of sin (all that He forbade or commanded) there is no repentance; merely a pseudo-spiritual humanism. Forgiveness / regeneration is 100% of God / Christ / The Holy Spirit; however, if one has truly been regenerated / forgiven / redeemed, he will realize that he is not his own, and that his duty is to obey; and if truly regenerated, the fruit of that regeneration is obedience to what God commanded. First step, order my book, Does God Repent...? — Can God Change His Mind...?, 506pp., pb., 25.00 + 4.50 P&H within the U.S.]
In closing, I would like to quote a declaration of Sir Isaac Newton, in a book that I have recently reprinted, The Religion of Isaac Newton, that summed up Newton’s true faith, as translated by William Whiston,* as given in lecture and later published by Professor Frank E. Manuel of Oxford:
[* though an Arianist / anti-trinitarian; he was the popular translator of The Works of Flavius Josephus.]
“ ‘This Being governs all Things, not as a Soul of the World, but as Lord of the Universe; and upon Account of his Dominion, he is stiled Lord God, supreme over all. For the Word God is a relative Term, and has Reference to Servants, and Deity is the Dominion of God not (such as a Soul has) over a Body of his own, which is the Notion of those, who make God the Soul of the World; but (such as a Governor has) over Servants. The supreme God is an eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect Being: But a Being, how perfect soever without Dominion is not Lord God. For we say, my God, your God, the God of Israel, the God of Gods, and Lord of Lords. But we do not say, my Eternal, your Eternal, the Eternal of Israel, the Eternal of the Gods: We do not say, my Infinite, (your Infinite, the Infinite of Israel:) We do not say, my Perfect, (your Perfect, the Perfect of Israel:) For these Terms have no Relation to Servants. The Term God very frequently signifies Lord; but every Lord is not God. The Dominion of a spiritual Being constitutes him God. True Dominion, true God: Supreme Dominion, supreme God: Imaginary Dominion, imaginary God. And from his having true Dominion it follows, that the true God is living, intelligent, and powerful; from his other Perfections it follows that he is supreme or most perfect’.”
Manuel then added:
“This is the testament of a believer who feels deeply the power of a personal, not a metaphysical, god...” (pp.16,17)