Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is it really like that? Can a person be (or believe that they are) their own father, their own son, and their own brother and their own uncle but the same person... without a personality disorder?
I would say not, but many mental aberrations are accepted as normal today.
I would say not, but many mental aberrations are accepted as normal today.
Certainly. An aberration is simply an aberration. Nothing wrong with an aberrant (and now highly popular) conceptualization of a God, as long as it is honest.
Although both Christianity and Hinduism have Triads, the difference is that in Hinduism, the three are all facets of one God, whereas in Christianity, Jehovah and Jesus are actual people-- two separate persons. So Hinduism is monotheistic but Christianity seems to be polytheistic.
Although both Christianity and Hinduism have Triads, the difference is that in Hinduism, the three are all facets of one God, whereas in Christianity, Jehovah and Jesus are actual people-- two separate persons. So Hinduism is monotheistic but Christianity seems to be polytheistic.
If you are talking about Hinduism's Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, they are considered different "stages" of the "constant Godhead," not necessarily "facets."
In Christianity, Yahweh and Jesus are "separate persons" but "of the same essential eternal Monotheistic substance," so they co-exist eternally as a single God together, with one being the "father" (the granter, the authority, the previous, etc) and one being the "son" (the heir, the subservient, the future, etc).
In Hinduism, Vishnu is eternal, as his form is Brahma when he creates, but Brahma is only Vishnu's creator and progenitor, and self, not Vishnu's co-existing authority and father (except when Vishnu is both sustaining and creating and wishes to see himself as subservient and Brahma as his Diest father). Even reading the Vedic scriptures, the idea of God is not as heavy constrained as in the Abrahamic faiths.
So when you think about it, it is more in Christianity that the three are considered "different facets" of God that are "equal on their own" to God by themselves. Their difference is more in mere "personality character."
Indeed, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva are equal on their own to God by themselves, since they are names of God when in different "action styles." In Hinduism, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva are not "different persons."
The thing which is considered "polytheist" in Hinduism is their total lack of psychotic hatred against worshiping lesser Gods (like Ganesh, Hanuman, etc) and minor gods (the once loved Indra, etc), as they see ALL HEAVENLY BEINGS (or even most often, all "heavenly sustained" beings in general) as manifestations of Vishnu LOVE to greater or lesser degrees.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 05-11-2019 at 11:58 PM..
I always like Hindu's religion. The dilution of "only one expression god" makes that toxic notion, in too high a concentration, more like a notion used for medicinal purposes.
of course side effects, like addiction, is a real worry.
Is it really like that? Can a person be (or believe that they are) their own father, their own son, and their own brother and their own uncle but the same person... without a personality disorder?
If we listed only the good the things a person does and only the bad things that a person does, we can make anybody look like 'split".
if we look at a human as a volume of the universe, does the same universe have different humans in it? are these volumes of the universe "fathers" to other volumes of universe? fathers to itself?
I am not defending a belief in a god thing. But for me to deny that three different things can't actually be the same thing, just from a different point of view, just isn't the best we can do.
If we listed only the good the things a person does and only the bad things that a person does, we can make anybody look like 'split".
if we look at a human as a volume of the universe, does the same universe have different humans in it? are these volumes of the universe "fathers" to other volumes of universe? fathers to itself?
I am not defending a belief in a god thing. But for me to deny that three different things can't actually be the same thing, just from a different point of view, just isn't the best we can do.
I'm very confused as to what you are trying to defend.
Are you saying that "a human looked as a volume of the universe" = "the entire universe" = "a section of the universe" then?
What do you mean by volume, by the way? volume of space? or different volume of a book?
I'm very confused as to what you are trying to defend.
Are you saying that "a human looked as a volume of the universe" = "the entire universe" = "a section of the universe" then?
What do you mean by volume, by the way? volume of space? or different volume of a book?
all i do is address what the claim is. What did the person say about a trait of his/her god.
The claim is "god can't be three things" or "god can be three things" that's all I looked at.
"god can't be three things" doesn't match observations. I addressed the notion that god could appear to be three different things from multiple perspectives. I can't think of one example where the universe isn't one thing.
so the assigned trait of a "god appearing to be three things and actually being the same thing" fits observations.
That trait, or characteristic, of the universe fits observations. I am for aligning traits of a belief to what we know about the universe.
all i do is address what the claim is. What did the person say about a trait of his/her god.
The claim is "god can't be three things" or "god can be three things" that's all I looked at.
"god can't be three things" doesn't match observations. I addressed the notion that god could appear to be three different things from multiple perspectives. I can't think of one example where the universe isn't one thing.
so the assigned trait of a "god appearing to be three things and actually being the same thing" fits observations.
That trait, or characteristic, of the universe fits observations. I am for aligning traits of a belief to what we know about the universe.
thats really all I do.
I don't think the claim was some separate even vaguer thing from the Christian Trinity.
Also, "I can't think of one example" is an argument from incredulity and ignorance (as lack of knowledge), so it is a highly fallacious methodology to decide on anything sincerely. I can think of many examples where the universe is not one thing. The universe is not blue, the universe is not 2-dimensional, the universe is not a section of itself, and a section of itself is not the universe, etc.
I'm still not at all clear on what specific sort of "three things" = "one thing" you are trying to defend.
Are you defending all existent and imaginable types of such equations? (This would be the type of defense that would try to defend a Christian trinity).
Or only the logical ones? (that a father cannot be his own son, and a son cannot be his own father, but a person can be a son of someone else, and a father of a different someone else).
Because of the way I see it, it is illogical for a thing to be eternally its own cause if it never had a cause. Well, unless it is nothing, I suppose.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 05-13-2019 at 07:26 PM..
Certainly seems that way at times because there are various places in the Bible showing a dialoguebetween Father and Son which is obviously seen as two separate persons.
I'm an atheist, but I mean, imagine if historical Jesus as portrayed in the Bible (as 'leader of men') truly existed in the role that the gospels portrayed him occupying...he'd constantly be having to explain to his disciples and assorted onlookers that he was talking to his father who was also himself...that this sort of 'clarification to onlookers' is not ever provided in the gospels is a major strike against trinitarian doctrine--how can you follow the son who is also the father if the son is in your presence and continually presents the father as a distinct entity from himself?
Mind you, I don't believe in the gospels as a historical account, per se, and I don't believe in god at all, but if I were a Christian, this 'lack of cognitive dissonance' on Jesus' part would, among many other things, present a problem for me
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
