God in inanimate objects

It is easy to see how God is active in living creatures, but it is perhaps rather harder to envisage what ‘God is doing’ in the case of inanimate objects, like tables or books.  When I look at a table and investigate it’s nature, an obvious question arises – is God making the table be, or can the table be without involvement from God?

The table existing without involvement from God would have to mean that there was some part of the cosmos in which God was not present.  But this cannot be, as God by His very nature (intuition tells us) is omnipresent.  Therefore there must be a sense in which the table is ‘in God’, or put another way, God’s being must permeate the table.  It is natural, then, to assume that God is holding the table in existence.  The table appears solid and stable, and it is perfectly possible for God to create these qualities in the table – God is omnipotent and therefore holding a bunch of atoms in place for a few hundred years does not pose the slightest problem.

Another aspect of God is that He is wholly in the parts as well as the whole.  That means that each part of the table contains the fullness of God.  It should not be hard to imagine then, that God in His infinite power, can create subtle change in objects such as tables over time.  We are talking, for instance, of de-colouring, acquiring woodworm, or drying out.  If the smallest particle is just as present to God as the whole table, then God can affect change on any level.

One might naturally ask, what would become of the table if God’s involvement were taken away?  Could it exist without God?  We have already established that God is everywhere, so we would have to conclude that there can be no table without God.

Taking all of this into account, shouldn’t it be possible for God to make major unexpected changes in the order of things?  For instance, if God wanted my table to vanish before my eyes, is this not possible?  Remember, we are saying that God is holding every particle of the table in existence.  I would have to conclude that yes, it is as possible for a table to vanish as it is for a tumour to vanish, as we hear about in the case of spontaneous remissions from cancer.  God could bring a table into non-existence in a flash, if He desired.  So why then, do we not see more instances of this?

Well, it is perfectly possible that God likes order.  Perhaps regularity is one of the things that gives God pleasure.  This is understandable if we remember that God has all of eternity at His disposal.  God might like to make some things appear and disappear (like a flash of lightning), and other things remain for hundreds of years (like a table).  Evolution (in objects as well as animals) may well please God, as the unfolding of His will and His plans provides our creator with anticipation and something to look forward to.

9 comments

  1. If all will is gods will, then why is the church against homosexuality? God must surely endorse homosexuality if all will is his will. And paedophilia, rape and murder.

    1. Hi James. In response to your question, I believe God creates people with many different views and opinions, including people who are against homosexuality and people who are homosexual. And Yes, I believe God is ultimately responsible for all those things you mention – all the good, and all the bad. I explain the reasons why in my ‘The Reason Why We Suffer’ post.

  2. So why would anyone go to hell if god was ultimately responsible for all those things, and how can God be love if he/it is responsible for all of those things. If god is love then surely god is also the lowest of the low.

    1. Who said anyone is going to hell? You seem to be confusing my philosophy with Christian theology. I don’t know what happens to us after we die, but I hope that God is merciful and treats people kindly. I believe that God is ultimately loving, but does indeed cause people to suffer during life. If you think that makes God the lowest of the low, then that’s your opinion. I think God is the highest of the high, infinite in knowledge, power, and wisdom. Suffering is hard but as I have said before, I hope (and pray) that God never lets suffering get too much for any individual. God could make everyone suffer agony for all eternity if He wanted to, but He chooses not to – it’s important to keep things in that perspective.

  3. I was merely inferring that if – according to you – God is responsible for free will then he is as much responsible for all the good as all the bad. In which case preaching “God is love” is, at best, a half truth.

    1. I don’t agree with saying “God is love” if by that you are implying that God does only the good stuff and none of the bad, which is what Christians tend to believe. I don’t have a problem with saying God is love if by that you mean God’s nature is ultimately loving, because I believe this is true (despite the suffering God causes).

  4. But you said in one of your posts “If God is love, and all is God, then all is love.” What’s the difference between that and saying “God is love”?

    How can you say God’s nature is ultimately loving if you agree that he is responsible for murder, paedophilia, rape and all of man’s other violent atrocities. Either you’re contradicting yourself or you have a very peculiar concept of love.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s