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.
God is the ultimate being, existing outside of the universe, and time itself. He created everything. He's a personal being, meaning that he is a person, and has attributes that we use to define a person. Makes sense, as we are created in his image. But he is not a physical being, as he exists outside of the physical world.
It's interesting that the Bible really doesn't attempt to define him concisely--it begins with the assumption that he just is.
Thank you for your response. Am i right that consider yourself a Pantheist?
Are you saying then you let Merriam-Webster define what God is for you? If I misunderstand can you please clarify?
Yes...I am.
The most basic idea of the concept...God = ALL. The very root translation of it, Pan(All) theos (God).
"G-O-D" is formally defined as "The Supreme/Ultimate Reality" and "Something of Supreme Value". I didn't make it that way, I just know that it is. It isn't necessarily defined "for" me...as much as it informs me (and everyone else) of the definitions/meanings.
"Reality" is oft times referred to as "The Universe (or multiverse)", "Nature", etc...though I don't really care about that, as long as it is understood that I view it from the standpoint of, *everything and anything that exists, in totality*.
Many times times people will confuse the concept and inquire or argue that what I consider "God" cannot be shown to be intelligent, or conscious, or have some other attributes. I try to explain that since my concept of God is ALL...it does not just possess those "attributes/traits" it necessarily IS those attributes/traits (and everything and anything else).
God is the ultimate being, existing outside of the universe, and time itself. He created everything. He's a personal being, meaning that he is a person, and has attributes that we use to define a person. Makes sense, as we are created in his image. But he is not a physical being, as he exists outside of the physical world.
It's interesting that the Bible really doesn't attempt to define him concisely--it begins with the assumption that he just is.
Interesting yes.
That is what my religion says as well, Brhman is. That is the definition.
So. Why do you limit him into a person, having the attributes of a person because that is what you know yourself to be, if it is not in the Bible?
Hmm. I cannot find that particular quote anywhere. Something similar "God is an intelligible/infinite sphere who's circumference is nowhere and center is everywhere" exists in some other texts. None ascribed Schopenhauer. One has to be careful because there are made up quotes ascribed to all kinds of people on the internet.
Schopenhauer was quite influenced by the Upanishads, reading a translation in German, from a translation of Persian from the original Sanskrit.
Monotheism generally -- and the Abrahamic faiths as they exist today specifically -- inherently see their god as the only true god. That means all others are false. It is an inherently pugnacious stance toward outsiders, and tends also to divide humanity into the right and wrong, correct and incorrect, and ultimately of course, saints and sinners, the forgiven and the unforgiven. In general, monotheists (to the extent they're even aware of polytheists or animists and such) would see this as a feature, not a bug. If the purpose of existence is to "know" god, then you must inherently know what god is not. Monotheism is a quest for Truth, basically.
My point being that Vishnu or Odin or certainly Zeus are very different gods from Jehovah. One aspect of the Christian god that BF did not mention is that of moral perfection or the various "omnis". Most gods who inhabit pantheons are quite fallible and occasionally mortals get the best of them (though it seldom ends well for the mortal).
So to my mind a better first question is "which god" after which you can define that god. Otherwise conversations like this degenerate into blind men pawing an elephant*; you'll never converge on a definition that all can agree to.
* Of course in my view the elephant is imaginary anyway, which makes for even more diversity of opinion.
Monotheism generally -- and the Abrahamic faiths as they exist today specifically -- inherently see their god as the only true god. That means all others are false. It is an inherently pugnacious stance toward outsiders, and tends also to divide humanity into the right and wrong, correct and incorrect, and ultimately of course, saints and sinners, the forgiven and the unforgiven. In general, monotheists (to the extent they're even aware of polytheists or animists and such) would see this as a feature, not a bug. If the purpose of existence is to "know" god, then you must inherently know what god is not. Monotheism is a quest for Truth, basically.
My point being that Vishnu or Odin or certainly Zeus are very different gods from Jehovah. One aspect of the Christian god that BF did not mention is that of moral perfection or the various "omnis". Most gods who inhabit pantheons are quite fallible and occasionally mortals get the best of them (though it seldom ends well for the mortal).
So to my mind a better first question is "which god" after which you can define that god. Otherwise conversations like this degenerate into blind men pawing an elephant*; you'll never converge on a definition that all can agree to.
* Of course in my view the elephant is imaginary anyway, which makes for even more diversity of opinion.
even if we deeply disagree, actually not so deeply, i always appreciate your posts. you are most welcome to join the conversation. but if all you can do is plant discord i request you refrain. one god or several and how one views god is as individual as there are individual minds. that is where it begins. it never stops there.
even if we deeply disagree, actually not so deeply, i always appreciate your posts. you are most welcome to join the conversation. but if all you can do is plant discord i request you refrain. one god or several and how one views god is as individual as there are individual minds. that is where it begins. it never stops there.
"plant discord"?? okay well, I'll play along: Curses, foiled again! Do carry on.
No problem. Those internet quotes are often unreliable. Go to the soirce!
...thanks, when i posted, my source was my seventy plus year old brain recalling a lesson from high school....i don't cruise the internet looking for 'cool' quotes...may i should start...lol
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.
