A mental image

[Thief]

Right. But how I consider God is not how you consider God. Isn't that right? They say it is wrong that we can consider The God differently.

No doubt you have seen my scheme of thought about God....
When considering superlatives....there is only one Almighty.
bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent and greatly experienced.

coupled with the ability to create.....stacked deck.

If an image is needed to interact as we humans do....then we would lean to a near human image....
but that would not be God.....would it?

God is not human.

how about a character like Spock of Star Trek fame?
can deal with humans....but we are a bit of a puzzle....
nice guy for the most part.....but don't get on his bad side....

 

[savagewind]

It is not my imagination that some people believe that for a person to be declared righteous by God he or she must have a correct image of God. That is debatable. Is it not?

 

[savagewind]

If someone believes that Jesu is God, then any image of Isha that they accept is defacto, basically, a *'image of God'. There is really no way around this logic. If they don't think that Jesus, or some other image/form, is G-d, then they simply do not have an image of G-d. I don't know where the debate is. Some people, I suppose, think that G-d has more than one person, or such, one might be an image, /like Jesus/, another might not have an image, but, if we are to really examine this, any image of any persona of G-d, is an image. The only aspect that I can think of, is that Jesus is not always portrayed. Now, this varies by degree. For example, I never saw paintings of Jesu , etc, around, but, they might be in a illustration, or something, not a problem.


I am pretty much in agreement with pickle, though; this looks like an ''opinion'', that is immediately presented as Scriptural fact, //however its according to your perspective.

*His man form.

Which statement, please?

 

[savagewind]

A mental image of god is this. I KNOW what God will do!

I personally do not know. But that is what the thread is about. Please.

They say they know what God will do and that I am better off believing them. That last sentence is NOT an opinion. That is what they say, post, teach, believe. OK?

 

[Thief]

Setting the 'human' aspect aside....we could go on...

As Creator, He designed and formed this chemistry in which we are developing.
As soon as the chemistry fails.....some level of judgment is expected.
I expect it.....I'm sure of it.

When dealing with Spirit that HAS expectation of His own......
I believe it behooves one and all to make careful consideration toward that Creator.

Stand before God and heaven....having made no acquisition of grace?
oh....oh.....

 

[savagewind]

The OP. We are being offered a ''correct'', interpretation, ie no image allowed, and variances of how someone deals with that. The thing is, people who consider Isha as G-d, are defacto portraying G-d, albeit in His man form. So, where is the debate, is the point I'm making.

The debate is whether a mental image of God is prohibited according to the second commandment for disciples of God. I understand that at the time of the appearance of Commandment Two it was about physical images.

 

[LuisDantas]

In regard to God....image is a word of double meaning....

God created Man is His image.....it's not physical.
God forbids a carving of representation of Himself....it's simply ineffective.

But we can't really do nothing....and expect all will be well.

If you make no consideration what God might be like.....
how then to prepare for the pending approach?

One has to wonder why either such an approach or a need to prepare for it would even exist. Where do people get those exotic ideas out of?

 

[savagewind]

One has to wonder why either such an approach or a need to prepare for it would even exist. Where do people get those exotic ideas out of?

To prepare for the future is wise. To prepare for anything important is really necessary. He is just bringing that up to the next level.

 

[LuisDantas]

To prepare for the future is wise. To prepare for anything important is really necessary. He is just bringing that up to the next level.

That does not answer the question I made.

 

[savagewind]

That does not answer the question I made.

People get their "exotic idea" of preparing for an afterlife from real life. Wasn't that your question?

 

[LuisDantas]

People get their "exotic idea" of preparing for an afterlife from real life. Wasn't that your question?

No, that is not a question at all.

Mine was how come people become so certain of some ideas as to actually want to warn others not to neglect them.

All the more so when those are so exotic as to be almost entirely self-contradictory to begin with, as that unexplanaibly popular conception that people should prepare for being judged for their afterlife by some sort of god or divine power.

That does not work as a justification for the joke that is Pascal's Wager, nor for anything else. Yet one would swear that many people actually believe it to be not only likely, but even a known fact.

It just makes no sense.

 

[Thief]

One has to wonder why either such an approach or a need to prepare for it would even exist. Where do people get those exotic ideas out of?

It comes from questions.....

Look in the mirror and convince yourself.....
All that you are is your own handiwork.
Your face, your hands, your feet, your voice....
are YOU the source of ALL that you are?

then of course you want to back up and consider....previous generations....

all the way back......

all the way back to the FIRST to have mind and heart.

All the way back to the FIRST in Spirit.....

and then consider .....what if.....that Someone might come to see what stands from the dust....

 

[savagewind]

No, that is not a question at all.

Mine was how come people become so certain of some ideas as to actually want to warn others not to neglect them.

All the more so when those are so exotic as to be almost entirely self-contradictory to begin with, as that unexplanaibly popular conception that people should prepare for being judged for their afterlife by some sort of god or divine power.

That does not work as a justification for the joke that is Pascal's Wager, nor for anything else. Yet one would swear that many people actually believe it to be not only likely, but even a known fact.

It just makes no sense.

It seems Thief does not go one step further saying a person must prepare his way or not be prepared at all.
The thread is about those who say you must prepare yourself THEIR way or you won't be prepared. They have made an image of the day of Jehovah. They really have. It isn't real imo.

 

[Nakosis]

Since many want atheism to have more than one meaning, I think we have to ask, is your atheism, a declaration that there is no deity, or deities, or does it mean something else

For me, I believe man creates the gods. Either consciously or unconsciously we gods as ideals of what we think a supreme entity should be. There is nothing objective by which to measure this image we create, No guarantee that whatever image we choose to see as God holds any reality. I also know, to whatever degree, people can experience subjectively the existence of this god or gods they have created. People feel they have personal evidence or experiences which support the god/gods they believe in. If a person wants to go through life experiencing belief in a god, experiencing a relationship with this god to whatever degree they are capable of doing so. I've no issue with that.

I don't know if we have only this one life or somehow existence continues beyond this one life, but if this is it, you might as well experience the life you choose.

I choose not to create an image of god. I choose to go through this life without such a belief. There, for me, is no higher authority than me. There is no entity to blame for my problems nor seek help from. There is no one to judge me except me. Being an atheist for me is choosing not to create an image of god to believe in.

 

[LuisDantas]

@Thief

You are free to ask and answer whatever you want to, of course.

But why you would anyone else to feel particularly inclined to make the same questions or find the same answers, I really have no idea. Yet you seem to pretty much assume that at some level most everyone would.

 

[Thief]

..... for me, is no higher authority than me. .

this one thing is a pivot point to which I cannot level anything unto it....

I do not believe I am the highest form of life.
I strongly suspect a spiritual life is pending.

we have hierarchy here and now.
I anticipate hierarchy in the next life.

 

[sun rise]

The thread's theme is about physical images and mental images, are they both considered disrespectful of God. Why or why not?

I believe a stubborn mental image is more disrespectful of God. I believe a mental image is able to do damage. I think a physical image can't do much damage

Here I think it gets to motive and the complex ways some religions have when they consider what the word "God" means. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think most Christians would find this disrespectful but instead a reminder of Love dwelling in flesh.

To me personally it's idolatry when you believe the image has power in and of itself. It's not if you take it as a representation and reminder of something higher without ascribing "magical" powers to the image.

 

[savagewind]

Here I think it gets to motive and the complex ways some religions have when they consider what the word "God" means. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think most Christians would find this disrespectful but instead a reminder of Love dwelling in flesh.

To me personally it's idolatry when you believe the image has power in and of itself. It's not if you take it as a representation and reminder of something higher without ascribing "magical" powers to the image.

I agree that when referring to a picture to view it is not magical. Thoughts though are magical. Are they not?

 

[savagewind]

Thoughts can cause things to happen, but pictures do not have such power. In fact the power any picture has to cause damage must turn into a thought first.

 

[LuisDantas]

this one thing is a pivot point to which I cannot level anything unto it....

I do not believe I am the highest form of life.
I strongly suspect a spiritual life is pending.

we have hierarchy here and now.
I anticipate hierarchy in the next life.

How do you know that there is such a thing as a highest form of life?

The best adapted for certain circunstances or the most fortunate by some parameters, that I can see.

But how does one get to decide in a non-arbitrary way that a certain form of life is somehow higher than some other?