The Bible is Full of Contradictions…God’s Omnipresence

Is God Omnipresent?

The psalmist writes:

‘Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me.’ Ps.139:7-10

‘Thus says the Lord: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest?’’ Isaiah 66:1

“Am I a God at hand, declares the Lord, and not a God far away? Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? declares the Lord. Do I not fill heaven and earth? declares the Lord. Jer.23:23,24

The psalmist, Isaiah, and Jeremiah are convinced of the Lord’s omnipresence. Yet Adam and Eve hid from the LORD. Gen.3:8; Cain went out from his presence. Gen.4:16; Jonah fled from the presence of the LORD. Jonah 1:8

Omnipresence means that God’s divine presence encompasses the whole of creation. That is what the psalmist is referring to in Psalm 139. Are there places where the Lord is not? In all these instances above, the characters can’t hide from the Lord, as the psalmist makes clear, but they can flee the place where God spoke to them, perhaps from the manifestation in that place of the God who is in every place. We could ever be hidden from him, flee from his omnipresence, but we can flee his call.

We are told in Genesis:

‘And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.’ Gen.11:5

‘Then the Lord said, ‘Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” Gen.18:20,21

Does the story of Sodom and Gomorrah indicate limited knowledge on God’s part? Did God have to travel to the plain to see for himself if the reports were true? Did he need to take a journey to see what men were doing at Babel?

This is very much indicative, not of God’s limited knowledge, or his limited presence. Rather, the language here is describing God’s actions in ‘coming down’ from mercy’s throne in judgement on the sin of man that is ever before his face. The activity of God can only be comprehended in terms men and women are able to understand, and our understanding is essential to the call to repentance.

When Elijah, fearful and exhausted, fled to Mount Horeb God spoke to him. We are told:

‘And [God] said, ‘go out and stand on the mount before the LORD.’ And behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind tore the mountains and broke in pieces the rocks before the LORD, but the LORD was not in the wind. And after the wind an earthquake, but the LORD was not in the earthquake. And after the earthquake a fire, but the LORD was not in the fire. And after the firs the sound of a whisper. And when Elijah heard it, he wrapped his face in his cloak and went out and stood at the entrance to the cave, And behold, there came a voice to him…’ 1 Kings 19:11,12

If God was not in the wind, the earthquake, or the fire, are these events where God is not?

Key to understanding this passage is its contrast with the spectacular events on Mount Carmel, where God spoke in stormy, fiery violence. The prophet, who heard God speak by such means, a prophet with a zeal for reformation (v.14), was being taught that this same God spoke in reassuring, providential whisper. It is not that God ‘wasn’t in’ the wind, earthquake, or fire, but that on this occasion he did not speak by means of these things.

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...

Cheers!

In their latest update #4, the Jehovah’s Witnesses' Governing Body has announced that toasting and ‘ clinking glasses’ is now allowed at the individual Jehovah’s Witness’s ‘ bible trained conscience’ . This, Governing Body member Stephen Lett tells us, is due to ‘ prayerful consideration’ by the Governing Body. This doesn’t sound unreasonable; who could possibly object to toasting, it’s such an innocuous custom? The answer to that is the Governing Body itself, until now. Ever since 1952, and possibly earlier, the Watchtower has roundly condemned this practice due to its ‘ pagan roots’ in ‘ false religion’ . The 15 May 1952 Watchtower (page 319), has this to say on the matter Jehovah God and Christ Jesus are not honored by having pagan customs of toasting switched to them, or to human s In 1968, in an answer to Questions from Readers, the 1 Jan Watchtower states If a Christian is going to make a request f...

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...

Bridge of Reason

Search This Blog