For those who believe in an ''invisible deity''.

[Tumah]

About dimension, I'm a tad unclear as to why this would limit the form manifestations of the invisible Deity. Since He is the creator, does it not make sense in some way, that He enabled a way to access the physical dimensions? He did with Moses, we know that. He affected the wandering through the desert as well.

You'll have to explain this further, I'm not sure what you mean.

Think about G-d before any sort of creation takes place. There is no dimension, there isn't even nothing. All there is, is G-d.
In this state, that is G-d Himself, there can be no form attributed to him, as form requires dimensions to define its structure.
G-d has no form.
In the same respect, G-d is also unchanging.
Time does not exist, so there is no point where G-d can be X and not Y.
A manifestation of G-d within the creation, could not properly be called G-d because G-d Himself has no form and is unchanging. If G-d were to manifest within the creation he would both have form and be changing and these are not properties of G-d. Therefore that manifestation is not G-d.

 

[Tumah]

Ah, I think I know what you are saying. I think He could just create an image. I mean, why not?

He could. And we would call that a creation, not G-d.

 

[Desert Snake]

Think about G-d before any sort of creation takes place. There is no dimension, there isn't even nothing. All there is, is G-d.
In this state, that is G-d Himself, there can be no form attributed to him, as form requires dimensions to define its structure.
G-d has no form.
In the same respect, G-d is also unchanging.
Time does not exist, so there is no point where G-d can be X and not Y.
A manifestation of G-d within the creation, could not properly be called G-d because G-d Himself has no form and is unchanging. If G-d were to manifest within the creation he would both have form and be changing and these are not properties of G-d. Therefore that manifestation is not G-d.

How do you view the Moses scenario?

 

[Tumah]

How do you view the Moses scenario?

Which one?

 

[Desert Snake]

Which one?

The burning bush, and G-ds general interaction with Moses. This seems like a manifestation..

 

[George-ananda]

Would you say that your deity has no form, though?

Yes. Or my second answer would be He is all forms.

 

[Desert Snake]

Yes. Or my second answer would be He is all forms.

So, there is no good and evil? Is your deity evil as well as good?

 

[Tumah]

The burning bush, and G-ds general interaction with Moses. This seems like a manifestation..

I would call it a Divine representative meant to express that a revelation of varying magnitudes is taking place. 1 Kings 19:12 "not in the fire, is G-d."
And I would also describe a revelation as a "thinning out" of Creation which reveals G-d's existence to some degree, rather than an increase of G-d's presence within the creation.

 

[George-ananda]

So, there is no good and evil? Is your deity evil as well as good?

No, evil is really ignorance of your true nature; divinity. Ignorance leaves with progressive enlightenment of the true nature of things. In the end all merge into Oneness/Nirvana/Enlightenment.

So-called evil people are really divinity masked by ego attachment. They will in the end become divine(I believe in reincarnation and that all this occurs over a long epoch of time.) . It is all just the cosmic dance of Brahman/God.

 

[savagewind]

If the deity is invisible, how do you actually know he/she/it has no form? Perhaps it just hides it's form? Is there some philosophical reason why it doesn't/wouldn't have form?

The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit. John 3:8
Spirit has as much form as wind has imho

 

[Gambit]

If the deity is invisible, how do you actually know he/she/it has no form? Perhaps it just hides it's form? Is there some philosophical reason why it doesn't/wouldn't have form?

Consciousness (human, divine, or otherwise) is invisible.

 

[Bunyip]

I think that perhaps you are reading too much into the word 'invisible', it could be interpreted as unseen. Not necessarily transparent so to speak.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think that perhaps you are reading too much into the word 'invisible', it could be interpreted as unseen. Not necessarily transparent so to speak.

The thread is referring to invisible, not ''unseen''. Or hiding. Those are different things.

 

[Pudding]

If the deity is invisible, how do you actually know he/she/it has no form? Perhaps it just hides it's form? Is there some philosophical reason why it doesn't/wouldn't have form?

What is "no form" means in here?

 

[Aupmanyav]

The burning bush, and G-ds general interaction with Moses. This seems like a manifestation..

Bushes and trees burn all the time all over the world. Moses was old, eye-sight problems, no ophthalmologists, don't think people wore spectacles. I some time ago had a corneal injury. I counted seven reflections of one light. When I looked at city and automobiles, it seemed like a virtual diwali. Multiple lights everywhere.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What is "no form" means in here?

I do not know the Jewish perspective, but in 'advaita' (non-dual) Hinduism, it means no form of its own but able to assume all forms. All forms being just its manifestation apart from the invisible manifestations like dark matter and dark energy. Nothing other than it existing, the sole constituent of the whole universe. That is 'Brahman' for some Hindus, uninvolved being one of its properties.

 

[Desert Snake]

What is "no form" means in here?

An invisible deity in this context, has no form. It assumes no forms, either.

//once the deity might assume a form, it has 'a form', regardless if it also has an invisible form.

 

[raph]

Like Tumah said, if a diety had a form, that would make dimensions bigger than said diety. But if this invisible diety chooses to appear in our dimensions as a burning bush or a man, that wouldn't make the diety "smaller": Because, if God appears as a form to us, it doesn't mean, that this God is subordinate unto this form, and it wouldn't make dimensions bigger than this God. The burning bush or the man would be subordinate to dimensions, but these are not the essence of God. These are only a way, he wants to appear in this world, without losing his self subsisting quality through the act of appearing.

 

[Desert Snake]

Like Tumah said, if a diety had a form, that would make dimensions bigger than said diety. But if this invisible diety chooses to appear in our dimensions as a burning bush or a man, that wouldn't make the diety "smaller": Because, if God appears as a form to us, it doesn't mean, that this God is subordinate unto this form, and it wouldn't make dimensions bigger than this God. The burning bush or the man would be subordinate to dimensions, but these are not the essence of God. These are only a way, he wants to appear in this world, without losing his self subsisting quality through the act of appearing.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Did anyone say that G-d would be subordinate to a 'form'? I certainly didn't.

 

[Desert Snake]

'invisible deity', means that it doesn't manifest, or appear, in forms. It doesn't mean that it is invisible part of the time, then might appear in a form. Once it appears in any form, it is not an invisible deity.