How God could be omnipresent if He is spiritual?

A spiritual being cannot occupy any space. How could God then be omnipresent?

By not taking up any space.

:thumbsup: :smiley: :clapping:

So he can be everywhere at the same time nowhere?

Within the limitations of our time-and-space-bound language…

In a word, yes

The truth project utube describes this

St. Thomas Aquinas explains (S.T. I, Q. 8, a2 - a3):

Incorporeal things are in place not by contact of dimensive quantity, as bodies are but by contact of power.

God is in all things by His power, inasmuch as all things are subject to His power; He is by His presence in all things, as all things are bare and open to His eyes; He is in all things by His essence, inasmuch as He is present to all as the cause of their being.

“GOD” is in neither time nor space. He is outside of both. This gives him access to all space and time. This is why it is possible to pray for someone who has died centuries before.

I know … crazy right!:thumbsup:

“Existence” can, at no time, be nowhere. Think outside the box, i.e. universe. Think outside of all universes.

Bahman. You are doing here what you do with a lot of your other posts.

You ask about something in one sense, than you switch the senses that you originally asked about.

You think (wrongly) that you have put forth a self-contradiction with theism, and then you demand an answer based upon your fallacious reasoning, walking away proverbially patting yourself on the back (when all you accomplished is yet another fallacy of equivocation).

Your questions also often have a built-in denial of mysteries (which is a hallmark of atheism. I am NOT saying YOU are an atheist Bahman. You could be frequently doing this, due to reasoning skills that still need some refinement and not atheism. Or it could be someone who is malformed in their thinking, has an inappropriate influence upon you. Or some other “issues”).

But I see this same pattern over and over from your questions, this question is the same (the fallacy of equivocation).

I hope someday you can get your logic squared away Bahman. I’ll keep you in my prayers.

God bless.


Ask God. Maybe He will give you the answer you seek. Peace.

By ‘nowhere’ I meant nowhere in particular.

But that is nonsense.

How God could be in all things by his power?

Outside time does not exist since time is an illusion. There is nothing outside space.

I know that it is illogical. But that is the only way to describe a spiritual God who is omnipresence.

What do you mean with particular?

Being in ONE particular place means you cannot be anywhere else. Since God is everywhere, there is no one place where He is, because that would then make Him not somewhere else.

If you are at the store, you can’t also be at home. Since God is everywhere at once, we can’t limit him to a single place.

Correct! Finally, an apparent breakthrough. One cannot sense God’s presence through sight, touch, sound, taste or smell.

The finite cannot engage the infinite at their initiative or on their terms. The experience comes only by His invitation and on common ground. The common ground is charity, His gift to us which operates only if we freely accept.

That sentence is exactly the reason you cannot understand or accept our explanations. Your concept of time is patently not the same as what is commonly held to be true. Time is not an illusion, since we all experience it. Just because you don’t understand it or can’t imagine it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Same goes for “outside space”.

You say you’re a physicist, but you are not taking a scientific approach to the question of God. In fact, you’re doing the exact opposite. The scientific approach would be to take a fact or situation you have observed and try to come up with an explanation. For example, gravity. Everyone knows how things dropped fall to the ground. Scientists through the ages have made deductions and hypotheses about the rate, force, and universality of gravity, which have changed and refined our collective knowledge about just how it works. But the initial observation still stands. Stuff falls when you drop it.

Theologians have the same method of finding out about God. They take what has been revealed to us through scripture, like his omnipresence, his omnipotence, his omniscience, and formulate philosophical theories on how these truths work. Of course, like scientists, theologians can disagree about the hows, but the truth that God exists is always there.

You, on the other hand, seem set on coming up with theories about what God is not, can’t possibly be, when you are convinced there is no God in the first place. What scientist starts out by trying to disprove something he doesn’t believe?

You’re trying to prove to us that our concept of God is incoherent but you obviously aren’t clear yourself on what we mean by “God”. I think you need to prove or disprove God for yourself first. That’s fundamental if you are at all sincere in going “wherever it may go”.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit