How do you tell the difference?

[Nimos]

I meant more an inner feeling. I know folks who can sit and accurately feel which Hindu God is being worshipped. So such a mystic could go around to say, a Christian Church, a mosque, a gurudwara, a synagogue, various Hindu temples, and come out with a different feeling each time, wouldn't that indicate something about the nature of the God?

No, it wouldn't as I see it. You can have people going to a sport event and cheering for a team and when they win the final they are all filled with energy and excitement. Basically its no different, than people can cheer or wish for the same thing and when it finally happens they all burst in excitement. It's not uncommon that people share experiences especially if you put them in an environment that supports it. Even when you are alone you can get such feeling, like something you personally really wished for and then suddenly it happens or you simply feel there is a chance that it might happen, can make you feel excited, but is not shared with anyone else.

So lots of things can get us fired up.

 

[Vinayaka]

No, it wouldn't as I see it. You can have people going to a sport event and cheering for a team and when they win the final they are all filled with energy and excitement. Basically its no different, than people can cheer or wish for the same thing and when it finally happens they all burst in excitement. It's not uncommon that people share experiences especially if you put them in an environment that supports it. Even when you are alone you can get such feeling, like something you personally really wished for and then suddenly it happens or you simply feel there is a chance that it might happen, can make you feel excited, but is not shared with anyone else.

So lots of things can get us fired up.

Sorry I don't catch the analogy here. My bad.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I think you misunderstood me.

I don't think so.

If I say to you, that only one car exist and it is red, there are no other cars at all, because that it just how things are. To which you reply "that you respect my opinion, but that you know there are many cars with different colors." then our statements regardless of how much we respect each other can't both be true.

Sure they can. If you have only seen one red car and are told that there is only one red car, then you are ignorant to the existence of other cars. But based on your experiences, you speak the truth. I, OTOH, have seen cars other than the one red one, therefore, I speak the truth. We both speak the truth base on our own individual understandings.

And you referring to me as being ignorant of your statement or wrong about my own, is no different than to say that my statement is incorrect. Because if my statement is wrong, clearly there is more than one car and they can be many colors.

The ignorance is not in the statement, but in the existence of other cars.

The premise for some of these Gods is that they can't lie or be wrong etc. So if I were a muslim jumping to become a hindu, clearly Islam must be wrong, otherwise I wouldn't do it. Hindu and Islam is not compatible, in regards to what they believe in.

I have direct experience in this. I was a Catholic that ultimately "jumped" to become a Hindu (it was more like hopscotch actually ). I don't consider the God of Abraham to be a fake god. I don't think Catholicism is wrong. But that doesn't mean that I don't think some of what most Catholics believe isn't wrong.

 

[Marcion]

If you as a believer, let's say a muslim, believe in God and this is the only God that exist. Yet you have people that believe differently, let's say a hindu, which must from the muslims point of view mean that they are wrong about their gods.

So how do you tell the difference between your own God(s) (the real ones) and the wrong ones (made up ones)?

And if you can't tell the difference, what reason do you have for choosing one God over the other?

I can only answer from my own viewpoint.
Generally speaking it does not bother me how or in which form someone directs their mind towards God.
Because for me, God is the Higher Self in everything, the Cosmic Consciousness where everything and everyone originated and will one day return.

But I do have a certain idea about God or gods (not originally my own idea) which helps me to make distinctions for myself only.
I distinguish four or five categories:

1. Brahman, the Cosmic Consciousness behind or within everything and beyond place and time.
This is in my eyes the exact same as Allah or the Christian God or Beloved Father (Jahweh).

2. Taraka Brahma, mysterious Guru's, historical personalities born with all of the occult powers who are born fully spiritually realized and who change the destiny of humanity by the impact of their lives in response to great need in human society in the time period before they are born.

3. more minor guru's who become deified, turned into gods, e.g. Jesus.

4. invented gods (by humans) who symbolize certain qualities that they wish to emulate by honouring and worshipping them.

5. invented gods that symbolize the forces of nature that humans fear and wish to appease.

The fifth category should be the oldest in the history of humankind, although the first one was always there without us noticing it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes, I think I would probably call that more of an issue, rather than an explanation.

For me personally, religion haven't played a role at all in my upbringing. My family doesn't care about it at all, at least not publicly Despite that these are fairly important questions, afterlife, meaning of life, does a God exist or not. So I have never been told what to believe or not to believe in. But even if I were told what to believe in, asking oneself such question should be equally important as if you are not told what to believe in. Because even if I thought that something divine or a creator existed, how would I figure out which one is the correct one, to me as a believer that would be a crucial question, because I wouldn't personally want to believe in the wrong one.

I think it depends on the practice. For example, I can't make up a god just sitting in my chair for an hour without any prebiases of what I'm supposed to be believing. I wasn't raised religious either so even if I were interested in a creator, I wouldn't know the difference just an idea.

But I notice from all religious there is some sort of practice and/or scripture involved. This kinda shapes what or who a god is and how they are different. Many cultures can't seperate their creator from their lives...it's part of their lives.

Since it seems you don't have that either I'd say look at various traditions or scripture to get an idea. Even better talk to someone about it if interested.

I don't believe any deity would just pop out if thin air, so it could be a giregine conclusion or take an active approach.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Yes, but it is irrational to determine truth like that.

To figuring out what you want to believe in, while not caring about whether it's possible true or not, it works. But it doesn't work if one cares about reality.

Since no two people can even agree what reality is, I'd say reason has it's limitations as a tool by which to understand it.

 

[Clara Tea]

So how do you tell the difference between your own God(s) (the real ones) and the wrong ones (made up ones)?

And if you can't tell the difference, what reason do you have for choosing one God over the other?

Satan pretends to be God.

You can recognize Satan by his actions. Your God might be Satan if he:

1. Says that he's "fighting the Axis of Evil" but actually does evil things (like kill).

2. Cuts taxes for the rich, while making policies that create hoards of homeless people. Remember, Jesus helped the little guys.

3. Seems paranoid. Has projects like Echelon, which was originally for five English speaking nations to spy on Russia, but turned into an industrial spy network, and spied on Princess Di, and spied on average Americans (revealed by me, first, from declassified documents supplied by EPIC and FAS, then revealed by Eric Snowden).

4. Mixed religion and politics, like the Religious Right, which voted in politicians in great numbers.

5. Destroys God's environment (and what a miracle that environment is).

 

[firedragon]

If you as a believer, let's say a muslim, believe in God and this is the only God that exist. Yet you have people that believe differently, let's say a hindu, which must from the muslims point of view mean that they are wrong about their gods.

So how do you tell the difference between your own God(s) (the real ones) and the wrong ones (made up ones)?

And if you can't tell the difference, what reason do you have for choosing one God over the other?

The concept of God in Islam is that there is nothing called a Muslim God.

The description that we know of God is that God is singular, he is the absolute, causeless, first cause or the cause, and he has no children, nor is he a child, and nothing could be compared.

So that will define the definition and difference you are looking for.

 

[Nimos]

Sure they can. If you have only seen one red car and are told that there is only one red car, then you are ignorant to the existence of other cars. But based on your experiences, you speak the truth. I, OTOH, have seen cars other than the one red one, therefore, I speak the truth. We both speak the truth base on our own individual understandings.

Yes, but that experience or truth or what want to call it, comes from a source that is claimed to speak the only truth. So when it say there is only one red car, that is not up for questioning, because if it were it would no longer speak the truth, making the source invalid. So both of us can't be right.

The ignorance is not in the statement, but in the existence of other cars.

But it is, if the source from which I got the statement, that there is only one red car, say so, and I believe that this source is the only truth. Then when you say that I might be wrong in my understanding, you might as well say that my source is wrong. And we are basically talking a statement like that, "There is one true God" so it not really up for interpretation of whether or not I could have gotten it wrong or not.

I have direct experience in this. I was a Catholic that ultimately "jumped" to become a Hindu (it was more like hopscotch actually ). I don't consider the God of Abraham to be a fake god. I don't think Catholicism is wrong. But that doesn't mean that I don't think some of what most Catholics believe isn't wrong.

Well that is your interpretation of what they might believe about certain topics given to them by God, or how to understand him etc. But wouldn't you agree, that you wouldn't find a Catholic claiming that there are several Gods? And if there ain't any other Gods, then the hindu gods clearly can't exist according to this belief.

 

[Nimos]

But I do have a certain idea about God or gods (not originally my own idea) which helps me to make distinctions for myself only.
I distinguish four or five categories:

So if I understood you correct, there is only one God and not many? So if someone claims that there are many gods, would they be correct then?

 

[Nimos]

I think it depends on the practice. For example, I can't make up a god just sitting in my chair for an hour without any prebiases of what I'm supposed to be believing. I wasn't raised religious either so even if I were interested in a creator, I wouldn't know the difference just an idea.

But I notice from all religious there is some sort of practice and/or scripture involved. This kinda shapes what or who a god is and how they are different. Many cultures can't seperate their creator from their lives...it's part of their lives.

Since it seems you don't have that either I'd say look at various traditions or scripture to get an idea. Even better talk to someone about it if interested.

I don't believe any deity would just pop out if thin air, so it could be a giregine conclusion or take an active approach.

What do you mean that you couldn't just invent a God? Writers are doing it all the time in fantasy books etc.

Why there are scriptures and traditions involved is fairly logic, if I told you about a God face to face, and you thought it was such an amazing teaching, you would probably share it with others, at some point (or when invented) sharing such stories and to make sure that they are consistent, it makes sense to write them down. If you read about a person in such story that like, such as the birth of Jesus and you love the guy, its fairly logic or reasonable to assume that you want to celebrate such thing, which over time can turn into a tradition etc. There are lots of ways that these things can turn into practices or traditions, simply looking at the different religions that have existed around the world, all of them had their own ideas of what these gods wanted.

 

[Link]

The true God has proofs for his religion and for his Messengers (a) while false messengers and false angels and their representatives have no proofs.

 

[Nimos]

Since no two people can even agree what reality is, I'd say reason has it's limitations as a tool by which to understand it.

Yes, in certain cases reality can be weird. But as a minimum it would be irrational to claim that something is part of reality without any form of observation laying a foundation for it.

Even if you take Gods, which we have no observation of, they are still not based on nothing. They were used as explanations for things we didn't understand. Zeus throwing lightning, Thor the thunder god etc.

You don't see anyone making a new religion today, trying to claim that Opir god of weather is the one causing lightning strikes to happen. We have a pretty good understanding of how they work.

Exactly the same reason why some scientists suggest a multiverse, its not something that they just thought would be cool, but because of observing the universe, such idea might be an explanation. So reason at least in my opinion is closely related to what I would call reality.

 

[Nimos]

Satan pretends to be God.

How do you know that Satan isn't the right God?

“I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people”

If God wrote it on your heart, how do you know that Satan is not the real one?

But still it doesn't address the question, Satan whether he pretend to be a God or not, is equally claimed to be true under the same religion. But it's about different religions claim about Gods.

 

[Nimos]

The true God has proofs for his religion and for his Messengers (a) while false messengers and false angels and their representatives have no proofs.

And which true God have provided proofs? and what are they, so they are clearly distinguishable from the false ones?

 

[Nimos]

The concept of God in Islam is that there is nothing called a Muslim God.

The description that we know of God is that God is singular, he is the absolute, causeless, first cause or the cause, and he has no children, nor is he a child, and nothing could be compared.

So that will define the definition and difference you are looking for.

So when a hindu claim there is many gods or norse mythology does are they right or wrong, according to Islam?

 

[Link]

And which true God have provided proofs? and what are they, so they are clearly distinguishable from the false ones?

Quran is a clear miracle.

When a Messenger is present there aside from Quran, clear miracles in display. In these times, we have to ask God to show us such miracles as the Guide is hidden.

The Quran challenges all humans and Jinn, to bring something like Quran and call witnesses who testify to that (experts). So far no one has met the challenge.

Aside from that, it has asked to bring something more guiding then the Quran if people are truthful.

 

[Nimos]

Quran is a clear miracle.

How is it more of a miracle than the bible? And in which way is it even a miracle?

In these times, we have to ask God to show us such miracles as the Guide is hidden.

And what would classify as miracle, do you have an example?

Because I would assume that a lot of people have asked God for stuff, which if I understand you correctly are not miracle's in nature? Obviously depending on what you mean by miracles, but at least I haven't read or seen anything in the news about anything that would come close to my understanding of what a miracle ought to look like, so I doubt I would miss such news if we were truly witnessing one.

The Quran challenges all humans and Jinn, to bring something like Quran and call witnesses who testify to that (experts). So far no one has met the challenge.

The Quran challenges someone to write a book similar to the Quran or what? and there being "experts" to witness it? What do you mean by experts? And who should judge whether the challenge is met, Muslims or Christians, Jews? Atheists?

 

[Link]

The Quran challenges someone to write a book similar to the Quran or what? and there being "experts" to witness it? What do you mean by experts? And who should judge whether the challenge is met, Muslims or Christians, Jews? Atheists?

If humans and Jinn can combine to bring like the Quran, they can call witnesses who can explain how the Quran challenge has been met and prove it to humans. So far, this has not happened.

 

[Nimos]

If humans and Jinn can combine to bring like the Quran, they can call witnesses who can explain how the Quran challenge has been met and prove it to humans. So far, this has not happened.

I can understand why it hasn't happened

Where does the idea of Jinns come from? We simply assume that they exists? That doesn't really work.

Couldn't I just make up a theory that some God live in another Universe and he created ours, because I assume that the multiverse is correct, and therefore it is reasonable to assume that this God also exists, because he is living there after all.

The Quran exist, we know that and we can agree on it.

You say it is a miracle and to me it is just a religious book. So how do you demonstrate your claim that it is a miracle and not just a book? And if you can't, why would you think of it as such and not just as a book?