Where do you get the idea that God is a person?
Where do you get the idea that he is not?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where do you get the idea that God is a person?
@Carlita
I couldn't have said it better myself.If there is pagan stuff in Christianity, then it isn't Christian.
You can paganize Christianity but you can't Christianize paganism. When you mix poison and water, its still poison.
If the Bible is true, then what need do I have to investigate other religions except out of curiosity as to what they believe....I have done this. I was not impressed by any of them and the ones that practice idolatry (which was many) were particularly repugnant to me.
Christendom so put me off Christianity that I almost gave up on God altogether.....but there was something in me that wanted to search for him. I thought I had exhausted all avenues, until there was a knock on my door. I had almost given up on God, but he hadn't given up on me. He introduced himself and I realized that I had never known him. He was nothing like what I had been taught....nothing.
Judging by what you have written above, it appears that you have a very unrealistic grasp of the God of the Bible. What makes you think that God has to be a material being to create matter? Einstein got it. I think he got a lot of things.
@godnotgod PMFJI
"The Light that I saw by was the Light that I was, and the Light that I was, was the LIght that I saw by"
I am curious as to whether that is your quote or of someone else.
When I googled it, I was directed to one of your posts here on RF, with no other options.
Where do you get the idea that he is not?
@godnotgod PMFJI
"The Light that I saw by was the Light that I was, and the Light that I was, was the LIght that I saw by"
I am curious as to whether that is your quote or of someone else.
When I googled it, I was directed to one of your posts here on RF, with no other options.
Great stuff. I remeber well when 'Hangman's beautiful Daughter' came out.
Twas quite a journey
@godnotgodThis is a succinct expression of the mystical experience of divine union, 'The Light' being the divine nature itself. IOW, as the Hindus tell us: 'Tat tvam asi'; 'Thou Art That'. You are none other than God. That is our true nature. The question is why we don't think so.
Ben Avraham said:Are you sure that "If there is pagan stuff in Christianity, it isn't Christian!" Okay! Take a look at Mat. 1:18. That is about the pagan Greek concept of the demigod which was adopted by Christianity. Have you ever heard about the demigod? It is the son of a god with an earthly woman. In the case of Matthew, God with Mary.
Now, are you going to get rid of the first gospel in the NT because I have shown you pagan stuff in Christianity? Of course not! You don't mean what you said.
You say that so authoritatively, like it must be a law.......but I have to ask...who said?A person or persona is limited.
The nature of the divine is unlimited, infiniite consciousness.
I've answered your question
now can you answer mine?
(You and I and everyone else, as well as the entire Universe, is none other than The Absolute playing itself as you and I and everyone else including the Universe.)
Time is the potential of a body in motion. For instance, put a marble on the top of a mount and tell me how long it takes for that marble to reach the basis of the mount. One cannot know until the marble is moving down the mount. That's the only way to measure time. Time is there all the time but, we don't know it till matter is in motion.
As a persona, God loses nothing...it is you who loses by assuming that he lacks it. Man is made in his image and likeness.
So.......? Who says the Creator can't possess infinite consciousness (whatever that is) and maintain persona as well. It sounds like you limiting God rather than him limiting himself....?
Would you like to rephrase?
Nothing comes from nothing.
Consciousness is never pure. 'Purity' is the base myth in this whole miscommunication. End game.
No, without motion, there is no time, otherwise you would be able to isolate it from motion. It is clear from your example that what you call 'time' is dependent upon motion. But what you are unwittingly doing is to lay down the gridwork of time first, and then have motion conform to the gridwork, which is linear in design. So you say that from point A to point B, it takes x amount of time, as shown by the increments on the measuring grid, ie, clock. But without laying down a grid, and then rolling the ball from point A to point B, it is all occurring in the present, where there is no time. IOW, the rolling of the ball from A to B is a single event occurring now; now when it is at A, and now when it is approaching B, and now when it reaches B. But even with a ticking clock present, all of the ticks of the clock occur now, and not in some linear fashion. Now is no-time, so one could have 2 ticks or 1000 ticks; they all occur in this timeless now. There is no past or future. You only think so because you have a memory, but memory is just traces of that which is already dead.
Matthew 1:18 is not a pagan Greek concept at all, just a poor interpretation of the passage on the part of someone who doesn't believe that Messiah has already been and gone.
I can't make any sense of this article. Here is another article that is much more informative. Virtual Particles: What are they?
Right! Without motion aka matter in motion, there is no time. You have finally learned something about time.
But matter cannot exist without time.
The example of the marble is only in the visible part of our consciousness. All matter is composed of atoms and every atom of protons, neutrons and electrons. Electrons are constantly in motion around the nucleus of the atom. It means we are never without time. It further means that when the Universe was caused to exist time was part of the matter that the Universe is composed of.
Where do you get the idea that he is not?