Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

If everything exist within God, does that means the vast universe is not infinite?

Look under the subject of ontology

8 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    that means God and the universe is totally beyond comprehension DUDE !

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No, God is infinite.

    As for who created God ?

    This question is logically problematic. If everything needs a creator, than no matter what exists, it must have been created. Furthermore, to be created means that someone or something had to create it. But then, who created the creator and so on? Logically, this would mean there would be an infinite regression of creators and we would never be able to find the first, uncaused cause since, by definition (the questions says that "everything needs a creator") there wouldn't be any uncaused cause. This would mean that the sequence of creations is eternal. But, if it exists that there is an eternal regression of creators, then who created the infinite regression of creators? Remember, the question presupposes that all things need a creator -- even the eternal sequence of creators -- which becomes logically absurd. Furthermore, if there is an eternal regression of creators that are eternal, then the question is not answered. In fact, it cannot be answered since it weakness is that "all things need a creator." Of course, this only begs the question in that how did the process begin? Therefore, the question only raises the same problem it asks and it is a question that, by its own design, cannot be answered. Therefore, it is invalid.

    The question is better phrased as a statement: "Everything that has come into existence, was brought into existence by something else." This is a more logical statement and is not wrought with the difficulties of the initial question. In the revised statement "Everything that has come into existence," implies that the thing that "has come into existence" did not already exist. If it did not already exist but then came into existence, then something had to bring it into existence because something that does not exist cannot bring itself into existence (a logical absolute). This pushes the regression of creators back to what we would call the theoretical "uncaused cause" since there cannot be an infinite regression of creators as discussed above and since in infinite number of creators would mean there was an infinite number of creations and created things including things that cannot be destroyed since they would constitute things that exist. If that is so, then the universe would have had an infinite number of created things in it and it would be full. But it is not full. Therefore, there has not been an infinite regression of creations.

    By definition, the Christian God never came into existence; that is, He is the uncaused cause (Psalm 90:2). He was always in existence and He is the one who created space, time, and matter. This means that the Christian God is the uncaused cause and is the ultimate creator. This eliminates the infinite regression problem.

    But some may ask, "But who created God?" But the answer is that by definition He is not created; He is eternal. He is the One who brought time, space, and matter into existence. Since the concept of causality deals with space, time, and matter, and since God is one who brought space, time, and matter into existence, the concept of causality does not apply to God since it is something related to the reality of space, time, and matter. Since God is before space, time, and matter, the issue of causality does not apply to Him.

  • 1 decade ago

    The universe is not infinite - well, let's just say that it is expanding and while it may become infinite, it still has boundaries. Interestingly enough "brane" collisions that produced this universe could also produce others, so the number of universes could be infinite.

    (This is based on my current understanding, you should review cosmology for more current details of the theory.)

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Science does not believe the Universe to be infinite.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    The universe is not infinite. If it is "growing", it can't be infinite.

  • 1 decade ago

    ummm well we cant truely prove that and i dont think we ever will but i want to know myself if the univers or galaxy or if anything ever ends its all so hard to understand i mean what if theres a planet like ours and people are our twins?! GAH HEADACHE!

  • Theological speaking it needs not to be finite, yet that's a cosmological question rather than a theological one.

  • Doma
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    God is NOT Omnipresent despite what most christians believe:

    This is a very difficult subject. The difficulty arises in part from tradition, and folks not wanting to part from tradition, as well as the definition of omnipresence.

    In all honesty, most christians hold to a definition that is not literal of the word, and therefore their belief should not truly be defined as omni-presence.

    Let's define it. From

    om·ni·pres·ent ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mn-prznt)


    Present everywhere simultaneously.

    This means God would be everywhere. And part of everywhere, is everything. Space itself is made up of matter. You would have oxygen, hydrogen, and so on. Hence for God to be everywhere, He would have to be in the objects that are located everywhere, unless He resided outside of all things by surrounding them. Like oil and water. Oil and water do not mix, therefore if you spilled oil in water the water would surround the oil and be present all around it but not in it. Ever see a Lava Lamp? I don't know what's in a Lava Lamp, if its oil or something else, but the "lava" does not mix with the water.

    But even this analogy is not omni-present, because some objects are quite deep, and how would God's presence in any way affect or be a part of the inner parts? Unless one believes that He resides on a sub molecular level and resides outside of each atom, thus invading structures without being a part of them. But consider, does size matter? Is God more in something if He surrounds a tree compared to surrounding the DNA of the tree? In both cases He is not in something, whether it's the tree or the DNA or atom. Therefore even this analogy fails to show God is everywhere.

    One must realize that the place "everywhere" must deal with objects. And thus we can conclude, with the scriptures shown in this page that this is not true.

    Some may say omni-presence means all things are in God's presence, like in His view or like a stage for Him. This is untrue as well. Doesn't the Bible teach us sin cannot stand in God's presence? Even the Father was absent when Jesus was on the cross because the sin of the world was on Him.

    Math 27:

    45: Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

    46: And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

    Deut 32:

    19: And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.

    20: And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

    Ps 5:

    4: For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee.

    5: The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

    6: Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

    Some would claim this attribute is in the Holy Spirit. He wasn't even poured out until Jesus ascended. So you cannot claim this attribute (omni-presence) is a continuous one (eternal), if He wasn't available until after that time. We also know Jesus never became available to the whole world until after He ascended either. This leaves only the Father being available.

    Some would claim the universe resides within the Father's being, that would not be right. Because the Father sits on a throne. How could He sit on it, if it resides in Him. It would be kind of strange, walking up to the Father, sitting on the throne, peering into His depths and seeing another image of Him, sitting on another throne. Sort of like the movie "The 13th Floor". Where folks made a computerized world, with real people inside it. And inside the computerized world, some computerized people made a computerized world therein also. C.S Lewis spoke of such a thing in his last book in the Narnia series. As they all entered into the garden with the Tree, they saw a door, inside the door was another Narnia, and inside that Narnia was another garden with another door to another Narnia. And Aslan kept saying, "Further in, further in!". This reminds me also of a cult that a friend of mine fell into, where he believed Jesus was a christ, not The Christ. He believed there were many christs, he also believed the Bible was like an onion, and it had layered truth, and none of the outer truths had any true substance.

    I love C.S. Lewis' work, but I don't buy into any theory that God the Father is some insubstantial being with everything inside Him. In Him is only goodness, and no death, therefore this universe has no part with the Father only those things which have been redeemed.

    There will come a time when all things will be in God, but that time is not yet.

    1 Cor 15:

    28: And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

    Col 1:

    19: For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

    20: And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

    Eph 1:

    10: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

    This future redemption is NOT just our bodies, but those verses spoke of ALL things.

    What many christians are ignorant of is that Adam was given the physical creation to take care of, but when he sinned, he gave it to satan. Now satan is the god of this world. Jesus is working to take it back:

    Rev 11:15: And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

    So the redemption of man coincides with the redemption of creation, why else does all creation groan?

    Rom:8:22: For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

    It is my belief, that these events will not happen simultaneously however, for the wicked will be thrown into the Lake of Fire at a different time when all the elements of the universe will be consumed by fire and God makes a new creation, but these 2 things are both a future work. If you believe that all people are redeemed already, if you believe God has regenerated the sun so that it will never die out, then you believe in things that are unscriptural. There are some cults that do believe Jesus has already returned a 2nd time, I even had a catholic priest believe this. But this is not scriptural.

    If its a future work, how can it be a present reality?

    If God does not yet have unbelievers in Him, how is He present in their flesh? Isn't flesh part of everywhere? Omni-presnt means present everywhere, isn't flesh part of everywhere?

    If the earth needs to be redeemed, then if you were to dig a hole in the earth 3 miles deep, is God there? If He is there, then why does the earth need to be redeemed? If the sun is slowly dying, is God in it? If He is, why does it need to be redeemed?

    I do not believe God is all powerful either. There are many things He cannot do. God can't lie. God can't do evil. God can't break His word. Many other things He can't do.

    Some would say that the universe must be destroyed because of man's sin. So God has to burn the entire universe; animals, suns, stars, planets, because humans sin?

    I don't buy it, and that is not what scripture says. It tells me that all the universe has fallen into decay and sin and is absent from God's presence, therefore it must be redeemed.

    Let's deal with some verses that folks use to try and prove God's omni-presence.

    Ps 139:8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

    If the psalmist (probably David) dug the hole himself, he would be bringing God with him. Because God was with the psalmist. But if you sent a machine to do it, and to test for God's presence. I have no reason to believe He would be found. Although you cannot test for His presence, but theoretically speaking...Or you don't even have to do any of that. Just abstractly thru science and reason ask yourself if God is 3 miles deep in the dirt. I think not.

    Col:1:17: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

    Lets look at a more literal translation:

    Literal Translation of the Holy Bible

    17 And He is before all things, and all things have subsisted in Him.

    The important word I think is the word "before". All things were made through Jesus, it is through Him, that they even came to exist. But once it existed, God set up laws to continue their existence, such as the law of "After its Kind". This verse speaks of origin. Not God's presence in it or around it.

    I want to say I do not believe in gnosticism, but believe that omni-presence in this age would probably be an offshoot of it, and thus why I disagree with omni-presence.

    Adam had a choice in the garden, well actually 3 choices:

    1. eat from the Tree of Life

    2. eat from the Tree of Knowledge

    3. Do neither

    If he did # 1, he would have gained eternal life.

    If he did # 2, we have what we have today, described in detail below.

    If he did #3, he would have continued to exist in the same condition he existed in then. A world without sin, but a world without eternal life. His body would never had sickness, but would be subject to damage, via accidents, and the like, although such accidents would be minimized because God was in the garden and there was no sin.

    But he chose #2. When he did, all creation fell in sin, and came into satan's authority. He is called the god of this world and in Revelation it will be futuristically declared that the kingdoms will now be the Lord's.

    I see no reason to believe the universe was created in God. I see no scriptural support. I believe it was created in a neutral state for Adam to choose which way to bring it. If he had eaten at the Tree of Life, then the universe in his subjection would have been in the subjection of God. God had given Adam full authority over the entire PHYSICAL universe. When he fell, it went to satan.

    Here is an example of where and why God was not present to the world in the Old Testament:

    II Kings 5:15 says, “And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.”

    Here is a NT verse to consider:

    2 Cor 6:14: Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

    I wish to submit a new idea to back up my position via a scriptural pattern.

    We know Jesus only did those things which He had seen the Father do, right?

    We know Jesus taught that a corn of wheat to bear much fruit has to die. And therefore Jesus had to die, so that the Comforter could come to all the believers.

    Therefore God the Father did this same principle. In creating the universe, He let it out of His hands, so that it could return back to Him, but Adam chose another path.

    This is also called the Isaac principle when God asked Abraham to kill Isaac, the gift he so waited for, which God had given him.

    I submit to you that since Jesus seen the Father do this principle, it was done with Adam and the universe.

    If you love something let it go free. If it doesn't come back, you never had it. If it comes back, love it forever.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.