Thank you for clarifying @Eternal Entity
If I understand correctly, you're saying that the Source itself is physical and that all created things are expressions of that physical Source.
What I'm still trying to understand is how that conclusion follows from the evidence you mention. We can both observe that created things are physical. But how does observing that created things are physical demonstrate that the Source itself must also be physical?
That seems to be the key step in your argument, and I don't yet see how nature alone proves it rather than simply assuming it.
In other words, what evidence specifically points from "created things are physical" to "the Creator/Source is physical"?
If I understand correctly, you're saying that the Source itself is physical and that all created things are expressions of that physical Source.
What I'm still trying to understand is how that conclusion follows from the evidence you mention. We can both observe that created things are physical. But how does observing that created things are physical demonstrate that the Source itself must also be physical?
That seems to be the key step in your argument, and I don't yet see how nature alone proves it rather than simply assuming it.
In other words, what evidence specifically points from "created things are physical" to "the Creator/Source is physical"?
