My new Tuesday class isn’t much on deep discussions. We had the question, “What does it mean to say we’re made in God’s image?” in our materials, and I tried to explore the question of what conclusions we could draw about God’s image from current evidence, and the other ladies clearly thought I was crazy and possibly insane.
“Good thing she usually just stands up there and sings,” they were thinking. “We had no idea she was a loon from loonyville.”
But seriously, some people think that God must be humanoid. I don’t know about that. If we look at all the life forms around, and imagine that they are predicated on God’s ideas about how life forms ought to be, we might be able to say that God is probably symmetrical. Or if not, then follows the Fibonacci sequence. I don’t know that we could go further than that, and even that has some big assumptions.
Since the ladies weren’t enjoying the conversation, and in fact were sort of backing away in their chairs, I came home and discussed this with #1 son instead.
He suggested that God was probably energy. This, he said, would help out a lot of religious positions, from the point of view of logical consistency.
Having fully discussed this, we then turned to the question of whether “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” is essentially an update of “Seinfeld,” as “Burn Notice” is essentially an update of “MacGyvor.”
Your views on all these questions are solicited.