Is it true that All is God?

    All is God- True or False?

    A lot of people like the idea of "all is god" (Pantheism), because they want to be part of god. They will tell you that they have "internal knowing".This is nothing new for the Gnostics of the second century believed they have the "special knowledge". As a matter of fact, the word Gnostics means knowledge in Greek. If you remember, this was exactly what Satan tempted Adam and Even with (Genesis 3:5), and the name of the tree which bore the forbidden fruit was called... the Tree of Knowledge (sounds familiar?). This idea of knowing what God knows sounds very intriguing for we all want to be like God. However, the concept of subjective knowledge of self-knowing is problematic. If two followers of "all is god" have opposite views on "internal knowing", who is correct? The followers of "all is god" will tell you that in order to acquire the truth, one needs to shed our experience which prevents us from acquiring the truth. They will tell you, it's like peeling an onion. But wait a second, did they say "all is god"? If "all is god", then it should include our experience, right? So why should we shed our experience? This does not make sense at all. Even if we do need to peel the onion, how many layers do we need to peel? Will we ever get to bottom of the subjective truth? For the Christian faith, the truth is an objective truth. It does not depend on our mood, or it's not influenced by others. The absolute truth is found in the Bible, and it's not a subjective feeling or knowledge.

    Another interesting topic on "all is god" is that of good and evil. If god is indeed ALL, then god is both good and evil. This presents an enormous problem, for it robs God of His divinity and holiness. He is now wicked and evil too. The followers of "all is god" emphasize that they only try to reflect and express god's love but overlook all the rest. If god is All, then he is both love and hatred. Why do we only emphasize his love? Who defines whether we should reflect and express god's love or his hatred? Who defines whether we should reflect god's goodness or his evilness? A lot of killers did claim that they heard god asking them to kill. Is it possible that they were indeed driven by this "Pantheistic god" to kill? If so, who could the "Pantheistic god" be, other than Satan himself?

    Another problem with "all is god" is that it means "all leads to god". This means that it does not matter what you do (good or evil) it will lead you to god. If such a god does exist, I do not want to have anything to do with him, for this is not a righteous god.

    Another problem with "ALL IS god" is that it actually means NONE is god. God is unique. Now if everyone and everything is part of god, then god is no longer unique. It's just like a presidential election. If everyone is the president, we might as well have no president. The same is true that if everyone is part of god, then in essence, there is no god.

    Yet another issue with "all is god" is that it cannot explain creation. If all things are part of god, how did god create us, heaven and earth, which is part of himself? Did God create Himself? If He were a created being, then He is not God. The Bible God indeed created heavens and earth (Genesis 1). But He Himself is not part of His creations. He is the creator and not a created being.

    As a conclusion, ALL cannot be God.

    Other False Teachings:
    All Paths Lead to God
    Internal Knowing or Self-Knowledge


    Bookmark This Page

    Send This Page To A Friend

    Place Your Ad Here For As Little As $1 Per Day

    Home | Arts | Books | Cooking | Entertainment | Games | Genealogy | Gifts | Health | History | Kids | Literatures | Music | News | Religion | Society | Software | Sports | Tea | Travel | Weightloss | Zodiac
    About Us | Add URL | Advertise with Us | Auction | Awards | Contact Us | Discussion Forum | Links | Search This Site | Send This Page | Shop | Top Ten Sites
    Copyright 2000 Yutopian, All Rights Reserved

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .