Contra Stavrinides Index
Next Part
Previous Part

Contra Stavrinides
by Frank Nelte

PART V: GOD AND "SPACE"

A major point in Dr. Stavrinides' argument is his claim that God is not in space ("not a spatial being") and not in time. On tape #3 he says: "God is not like anything at all."

His Handout #7, entitled "SETTLING THE QUESTION OF SPACE", is presented as his proof in this regard.

1. In the lecture he quotes Deuteronomy 4:15, where Moses is talking to Israel ...

   Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day [that] the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: (Deuteronomy 4:15)

   And verse 16 reads:

   Lest ye corrupt [yourselves], and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, (Deuteronomy 4:16)

   Referring to these two verses Dr. Stavrinides says (tape #3):

   "IT SAYS GOD DOES NOT HAVE A FORM."

   That statement is simply not honest! What is says is that Israel did not "SEE" any form in that day ... but that does not mean that therefore God does not "HAVE" a form! Simply because you don't "see" something, that does not mean that it therefore does not exist.

   This example is typical of the totally unwarranted deductions he makes from the scriptures he presents. It is typical of what he calls his "implicit" evidence.

2. Let's look at Handout #7 and examine his arguments:
   • the First Argument states that all "MATTER" is created (this is correct!) and that therefore God is not a "MATERIAL" being. NOBODY IN GOD'S CHURCH HAS EVER CLAIMED THAT GOD IS A "MATERIAL" BEING! This argument is totally meaningless. It is nothing more than "a red herring", intended to obscure the real issue.
   • the Second Argument states that "all space is created".

     THIS IS FALSE!

     It is totally false to assume that "SPACE" is something that somehow has to be "created". "Space" without matter or energy in it is "NOTHING"! It is emptiness ... it is an absence of 15.

     It is totally false to assume that "SPACE" is something that somehow has to be "created". "Space" without matter or energy in it is "NOTHING"! It is emptiness ... it is an absence of anything created. What God has done in creation, is to fill this empty void called "space". God has left vast gaps between the objects He created (stars, planets, etc.). These gaps we call "space". But what lies beyond the confines of this universe? Is there an end to this universe, a point where one would exit from this universe? There is just empty "space" beyond the limits of what God created, that's all.

     THERE IS NOT ONE SHRED OF PROOF THAT "SPACE" IS SOMETHING GOD HAD TO "CREATE"!

     "Space" is not really something that depends on the existence of matter. The presence of matter is merely helpful in defining space.

     Dr. Stavrinides claims that God fills the entire universe; is everywhere. This is nonsense. Does God keep expanding as the universe expands? WHERE was God before He supposedly "created" space? WHERE did God exist before the "creation" of space? IF He existed, then He was "SOMEWHERE"! That "somewhere" is SPACE ... even if God had not yet created the first atom of physical matter!

     The absence of physical matter does not in any way preclude the possibility of the existence of two spirit beings, each with a separate spirit body.

   • The Third Argument states that God is not a being that needs any thing. What God "NEEDS" is not the question and never has been. This argument is just another "red herring".
   • the Fourth Argument states that God is not a material being. This is simply a repetition of the meaningless "red herring" already stated in the first argument.
   • the Fifth Argument is nothing more than a repetition of argument #4, which itself was a repetition of argument #1, plus a repetition of argument #2, which we saw is nonsense.
   • the Sixth Argument quotes Romans 1:23, which reads:

     And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. (Romans 1:23)

     Then it states:

     "THIS PASSAGE SHOWS CLEARLY that God is not in the shape of corruptible man, birds, fourfooted beasts, or creeping things."

     THIS IS ALSO NOT TRUE!

     Romans 1:23 doesn't show that at all!

     Man is corruptible ... we can die and then we decay. God is incorruptible. God clearly instructed mankind NOT to even attempt to make any pictures or representations of Him. The very best that man could produce (e.g. some people might think of Michaelangelo's works in the Sistine Chapel in Rome) would still only be an insult to the glory of the Almighty God, as it would reduce Him to human terms.

     IT IS A DEBASEMENT TO REPRESENT A GLORIOUS SPIRIT BODY IN PHYSICAL TERMS ... IT IS AN INSULT!

     Romans 1:23 does not in any way comment on the shape God has. This verse only condemns the pagans for having attempted to represent God through statutes and pictures. Paul, who wrote Romans 1:23 also wrote ICorinthians chapter 15. There he said:

     It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (ICorinthians 15:44)

     Paul states very clearly that in the resurrection there is a SPIRITUAL BODY (Greek is "pneumatikos soma"). It is a body (i.e. "soma") composed of spirit (i.e. "pneuma"). But such a body cannot be represented in physical terms, as the pagans attempted to do. Though invisible to HUMAN eyes, such spiritual bodies certainly are very real, having specific shapes, in the realm of God and other spirit beings.

   • the Seventh Argument states that God is invisible and has no VISIBLE form or shape. This is true ... but not being visible to HUMAN eyes does not prove that God does not have a form and shape which is very much visible to other spirit beings. This is just another "red herring", since being visible or invisible has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not God is a spatial being with a form and shape. This argument also states that God is not a material or spatial being ... the term "material" is a "red herring", repeated from arguments #1 and #4 and #5.
3. Let's summarize these 7 arguments, which are supposedly so "logical"...
   • ARGUMENT #1 = a meaningless "red herring";
   • ARGUMENT #2 = an unproven and false assertion;
   • ARGUMENT #3 = another meaningless "red herring";
   • ARGUMENT #4 = the "red herring" from #1 repeated;
   • ARGUMENT #5 = "red herring" from #1 repeated plus repetition of the false, unproven assertion from #2;
   • ARGUMENT #6 = a misrepresentation of Romans 1:23;
   • ARGUMENT #7 = another "red herring" is introduced and "red herring" #1 is stated for the fourth time for emphasis ... plus the false assertion from #2 is stated for the third time ... also for emphasis.

   That's it! That is supposed to "settle" the question that God does not have a form or shape. But does it really "prove" what Dr. Stavrinides claims?

   No, it does not! What we have is nothing more than "A REALLY FISHY STORY", right?

4. The many, clear scriptures that refer to God having a spiritual body, of which the human body is a representation on the physical, material level are carefully avoided. As usual, "they will be addressed when someone raises a question about them". However, the outcome of whatever questions may come up will not affect the correctness of Dr. Stavrinides' theory, right? After all, Handout #7 has "settled" the question of "space", we have been assured.

   The few scriptures that have been selected by Dr. Stavrinides in the presentation of these seven "arguments" don't comment on God's form and shape. They simply make general statements. They do not warrant any deductions that make a meaningful contribution to his overall argument.

5. The approach we have examined in Handout #7 is typical of Dr. Stavrinides' entire presentation. It consists of slipping an unproved assertion or an unwarranted deduction into the middle of a series of smoke-screens or "red herrings". If he can succeed in confusing the viewer or listener with these smoke-screens, then the viewer/listener is also likely to miss the wrong assertion, which is so vital for establishing Dr. Stavrinides' theory. This approach has also been used with all the doctrinal write-ups by Dr. Stavrinides on the doctrinal changes that have been made in the last few years.
6. On tape #10, right at the start, he presents one of his typical arguments about God supposedly not being spatial. The whole thing is an example of carnal reasoning that refuses to consider scriptures that clearly contradict his ideas. He reasons from: form to shape to human to animal to birds to fish to column of fire to cloud to extension to being spatial. The question he had phrased for us was:

   "Couldn't God have form and shape even if He is not subject to space?"

   The question of whether THE BIBLE tells us anything about God having a form and shape doesn't enter his considerations. Instead he says:

   "To ask 'IF' is rude and disrespectful of the arguments I write on the board."

   He then waxed eloquent and said: "ANGELS would have to agree with my arguments". And if an angel were to disagree with his reasoning, then , said Dr. Stavrinides, "I would tell him HE IS WRONG!".

   Those are very revealing statements. Think about them for a moment. They reveal a considerable amount of arrogance, to say the least. On top of that he is showing quite clearly that HE FEELS HE KNOWS IT ALL AND THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE CAN BRING UP, NOT EVEN AN ANGEL OF GOD, THAT WILL CONVINCE HIM THAT HE IS WRONG.

   If anyone cares to listen to tape #10, then it becomes very clear that Dr. Stavrinides was not referring to any "fallen" angels ... they are lying spirits and lie all the time. He was referring to the righteous angels of God. And the righteous angels of God are used to bring messages from God.

   When I heard those comments on tape #10, I couldn't help thinking about the arrogance of Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran Church, who once said:

   "What I teach and write remains true even though the whole world should fall to pieces over it ... whoever rejects my doctrine cannot be saved ... nobody should rise up against me."

   On tape #8 Dr. Stavrinides had already expressed his hostility to questions. There he made the following statements:

   "I am not allowed to say: IF the conclusion is right, THEN ... that is a naughty question";

   "IF is rude, so please cut it out";

   "I will not tolerate the word IF ... and WHEN is meaningless".

7. His argument never takes the meaning of "SUBJECT" into consideration. The word "subject" means: under authority! God certainly has a form and shape, as the Bible makes abundantly clear ... but that does not put God under the authority of space, or in subjection to space. God CONTROLS space even though He does have a form!

   The reason God has filled emptiness (i.e. space) with creation is because space IS meaningful to God. When God created what we call "the universe", He created something that is meaningful to Him, because He is spatial and He can move around in this universe.

   Notice Revelation 21:3 ...

   And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God [is] with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, [and be] their God. (Revelation 21:3)

   God will "dwell" --- LIVE! --- for all future eternity in a spatial environment; and yet somehow we are to believe that He is not a spatial being. The idea is absurd!19.

   In summary, we have to conclude that Dr. Stavrinides' assertion about God not being a spatial being with a form and a shape is FALSE! Thus, even though he repeats that assertion "A THOUSAND TIMES" to brainwash his viewers, it is still wrong and must be rejected.

   And since this vital premise is false, therefore his conclusions are equally false!

   Q.E.D.

Contra Stavrinides Index
Next Part
Previous Part