Who is God?

[Aupmanyav]

Why is it a problem? Judaism does not require anyone to believe who is not directly connected to the events described. Further, there's a benefit to not knowing because knowing undermines a completely true understanding. That is the entire purpose of this thread.

Do you mean that we should not even make an effort to know? How will we have complete true understanding if we do not even make an effort towards that? And scientific efforts give many side products (like the atom bomb ). It is much like 'Acinteyyas' in Buddhism. Buddha said 'do not even make an effort to understand'. But then, it is different with Hindus. We say make best effort to go to the innermost mystery.
"Tejasvināvadhitamastu" - (May our efforts be brilliant - Tejasvi nau adhitam astu).

 

[dybmh]

Do you mean that we should not even make an effort to know?

Accepting that one cannot know is the first step in understanding things beyond nature.

How will we have complete true understanding if we do not even make an effort towards that?

The effort is to be release oneself from the self-imposed limitation to know.

And scientific efforts give many side products (like the atom bomb ). It is much like 'Acinteyyas' in Buddhism. Buddha said 'do not even make an effort to understand'. But then, it is different with Hindus. We say make best effort to go to the innermost mystery.
"Tejasvināvadhitamastu" - (May our efforts be brilliant - Tejasvi nau adhitam astu).

I'm not sure what Buddha said, or meant. But understanding is different than knowing. If God is all and more ( Infinite / Panentheism ), then any actual knowledge I obtain will always be incomplete. Anything I consider about God intellectually is a projection at best. If I understand that, then one way of defining God is through a series of unanswered questions. The challenge is to maintain them as unanswered, and allow the mind to be released from the desire, the need to know.

From this, a person can intellectually commune with a hidden / non-material / infinite being in absolute truth. Absolute truth is required because nothing less is permitted beyond out material world.

If all of this is true, and I think it is, then avoiding knowledge of God is a way of understanding God by accepting/defining God with a series of unanswered questions. If a person can do this, then it is a method for achieving spiritual freedom in a pure and holy way.

This is why I started the thread asking "Who is God?" Then I immediately answered "Yes!" Then gave the hint: "The question is the answer."

 

[Aupmanyav]

Accepting that one cannot know is the first step in understanding things beyond nature.
I'm not sure what Buddha said, or meant. But understanding is different than knowing. If God is all and more ( Infinite / Panentheism ), then any actual knowledge I obtain will always be incomplete.
From this, a person can intellectually commune with a hidden / non-material / infinite being in absolute truth.
If all of this is true, and I think it is, then avoiding knowledge of God is a way of understanding God ..
This is why I started the thread asking "Who is God?" Then I immediately answered "Yes!" Then gave the hint: "The question is the answer."

That according to me is the worst thing to do. Accepting defeat even before the war has begun!
Buddha said that very clearly. He added that contemplating on 'Acinteyya' will bring vexation in mind and can cause madness. At least, he was honest with his reason - 'They don't help in eradication of sorrow in life'. Well, that was his view. Hinduism does not restrict any effort even to the extent of denial of Gods and Goddesses. The unanswerable questions - Wikipedia
Your third sentence to one reply to me contains an 'if' (underlined by me). So, how do you know that any knowledge that you ferret out will be incomplete?
Is it communication with the said being (again underlined) or fulminations of mind?
I come to another 'if' (I underline it again). You use 'if' only too frequently. What is all these 'ifs' are not true? Is there any evidence for any of the 'ifs'?
Asked a question and gave the reply which you consider as truth without waiting for forum members to comment on it. Very nice.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

The place holder to absolute truth

 

[muhammad_isa]

The place holder to absolute truth

What?
Do you know something I don't? Has Jesus actually returned?

 

[dybmh]

Your third sentence to one reply to me contains an 'if' (underlined by me). So, how do you know that any knowledge that you ferret out will be incomplete?

If God is infinite and hidden then anything a finite being can know about God will be incomplete. That's what inifinite and hidden means.

Is it communication with the said being (again underlined) or fulminations of mind?

I have had some amazing experiences that are beyond anything that I can describe.

I come to another 'if' (I underline it again). You use 'if' only too frequently. What is all these 'ifs' are not true? Is there any evidence for any of the 'ifs'?

Do you like green eggs and kosher-ham?

Asked a question and gave the reply which you consider as truth without waiting for forum members to comment on it. Very nice.

Is there something wrong with making a provactive statement to begin a theological discussion?

 

[osgart]

My God embodies all positive character traits, and virtues; there's around one hundred of such. My God is none of the negatives, and vices. My God doesn't exist. However it's a good and precise measuring stick for the existence of God.

All God's morals are predicated on trustworthiness and deservingness according to the heart. Right relationship, right loyalties, right things for right places. Nothing out of order with total freedom for the upright. My God is the impossibility of malevolence and arrogance in God and those that freely choose the truth that God is. My God wishes no enemies, but is forced to be enemies by the nature of those that choose wickedness. My God defends the innocent, and casts out the wicked. God's utmost desire is to have equality and friendship with those that live. God is a giver only that is forced to take lives that go against innocent nature. Mercy and repentance are God's desire for those that have not strayed too far. War and death is reserved for absolute wickedness. Perhaps universal salvation comes through these means as well.

I've never found God to exist. Only in imagination does God exist.

 

[Aupmanyav]

God is a giver only that is forced to take lives that go against innocent nature.
I've never found God to exist. Only in imagination does God exist.

Yeah, God is the giver of disasters and diseases, even for lives that do not go against nature. He is dangerous even when imaginary.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If God is infinite and hidden then anything a finite being can know about God will be incomplete. That's what inifinite and hidden means.
I have had some amazing experiences that are beyond anything that I can describe.
Do you like green eggs and kosher-ham?
Is there something wrong with making a provactive statement to begin a theological discussion?

Yeah, that is what the religious should explain. And if they say God passed on the message to some person, then we have no definite proof.
Personal experiences are evidence for you and none other.
Like or not, I eat what my wife prepares. I have tried to interest her in ham but it is no use. She does not use garlic too.
Nothing wrong with it, but it peters out for absence of evidence.

 

[osgart]

Yeah, God is the giver of disasters and diseases, even for lives that do not go against nature. He is dangerous even when imaginary.

How can someone that don't exist be dangerous?

 

[Aupmanyav]

How can someone that don't exist be dangerous?

He does exist for the theist. They should understand that he is dangerous. Of course, I have a different view about God and dangers.

 

[InChrist]

Moses' ancestors were Levite Jews, and YHWH is a God who did not want the tribe to worship any other God or Goddess but him.
I do not think YHWH ever said that he is the only God and there is no other God or Goddess.

I think YHWH did say…

Do not fear, nor be afraid; Have I not told you from that time, and declared it? You are My witnesses. Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not one.’ ” Isaiah 44:8

Tell and bring forth your case; Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from ancient time? Who has told it from that time? Have not I, the Lord? And there is noother God besides Me, A just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me.
Isaiah 45:21

 

[Sargonski]

Yeah, God is the giver of disasters and diseases, even for lives that do not go against nature. He is dangerous even when imaginary.

How can someone that don't exist be dangerous?

It is not the image of God that is dangerous .. but the belief that God actually cares about your sorry backside --and intervenes in the affairs of Mortals on a regular basis.

and that should answer Osgarts question as well. The belief that folks know the will of God .. extremely dangerous .. at least it was for Cats .. When the Pope decreed them helpers of Sataniel or some such thing .. spurring a rash of Cat Killings and Torture in the Middle ages.

 

[dybmh]

It is not the image of God that is dangerous .. but the belief that God actually cares about your sorry backside --and intervenes in the affairs of Mortals on a regular basis.

and that should answer Osgarts question as well. The belief that folks know the will of God .. extremely dangerous .. at least it was for Cats .. When the Pope decreed them helpers of Sataniel or some such thing .. spurring a rash of Cat Killings and Torture in the Middle ages.

Just a quick note to say HI, welcome to the thread, and welcome to RF. It's nice to have you here.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Isiah 1.1: "The vision concerning Judah and Jerusalem that Isaiah son of Amoz saw during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah."

It is a vision and not something that really happened.
The other day, I saw some one hotly embrace me even at my age. I do not remember who. I was highly surprised. Not something which happened for a long long time. Nothing that really happened.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The article indicates a geographic region far from India, and that they were slaves in egypt.



Why is it a problem? Judaism does not require anyone to believe who is not directly connected to the events described. Further, there's a benefit to not knowing because knowing undermines a completely true understanding. That is the entire purpose of this thread.

I call that faith. And it is only true for the person, for which it is true.

 

[osgart]

He does exist for the theist. They should understand that he is dangerous. Of course, I have a different view about God and dangers.

I suppose God is dangerous if someone uses God to justify literally anything they themselves do. For me it's simply an ideal that no one can live up to as human beings. The ideal of an ultimate sense of fairness and love for life, self and others. A worthy goal to transcend beyond the norms of society. It's a dream that has produced great art and artists as well. If one gets the ideal wrong then it's very dangerous. No one acts on behalf of God. People that think they are doing God's will can be very dangerous.

My sense of God humbles me to do better, and accept my human limitations. No one can live up to the powers of being a God. The character of God is something to strive for IF that God is truly good. The idea that humans can judge like God is very dangerous. Being human is all about being wise enough to know one's own limits and being humble enough to accept those limits, and then progressing forward to one's own maximum potential. A maximum that humans may never fully realize.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I suppose God is dangerous if someone uses God to justify literally anything they themselves do. For me it's simply an ideal that no one can live up to as human beings. The ideal of an ultimate sense of fairness and love for life, self and others. A worthy goal to transcend beyond the norms of society. It's a dream that has produced great art and artists as well. If one gets the ideal wrong then it's very dangerous. No one acts on behalf of God. People that think they are doing God's will can be very dangerous.

My sense of God humbles me to do better, and accept my human limitations. No one can live up to the powers of being a God. The character of God is something to strive for IF that God is truly good. The idea that humans can judge like God is very dangerous. Being human is all about being wise enough to know one's own limits and being humble enough to accept those limits, and then progressing forward to one's own maximum potential. A maximum that humans may never fully realize.

And that can be done with the Truth, Rational, Logic or any other words that in effect function the same way.
In fact I know I am right and you are wrong with evidence, truth, proof or whatever is the general version and can be done without claiming God.
The standard for some non-believers is Objective Reality and that works in the same way as God.

 

[dybmh]

I call that faith. And it is only true for the person, for which it is true.

It could be true for God too, right?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It could be true for God too, right?

Yes, it could be true, but that is could be. Not that is known to be true.