God

BaldJean wrote: ... you are confusing two things. if a theologian says "the bible says the earth is 10,000 years old" then this is a theological statement about the bible, and science has to keep out of it. however, if a theologian says "the earth is 10,000 years old because the bible says so" then he uses a theological argument in a scientific debate, which, as I mentioned before, he should not. I hope you notice the subtle difference

The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.   - Lao Tzu

 

The god that can be defined is not the eternal God. 

God’s abode is beyond all vibratory creation.  As Jaketejas mentioned, He is not confined by time and space.  God is beyond the little ego’s understanding.  Beyond any thought process; beyond the scope of our imagination.

The human intellect can only get so close with certain attributes.   I think first and foremost should be that of Unconditional Love.  Just think about that- Unconditional.  

There’s absolutely no reason for fear.  Fear will only distance you from that which you seek.

It may also be somewhat erroneous to think that God created the universe, but rather that an infinitesimal part of his infinite being became the universe.

Even though His existence is beyond the material, astral and causal, He is very much present in every single atom in the cosmos.

God is everything; there can be no limitation or confinement.  He is personal and impersonal, formless but can take on any form.  He can appear as Light, Mother, Father, Divine Friend or any other form a true devotee holds dear.

 

Due to the law of cause and effect, free will may not be that apparent.  Karmic reach spans numerous lifetimes and seemingly seals our fate.  Because of our free will we ventured off and subjugated ourselves to delusion.

I like the point made about God not wishing to create automatons, but humans with free will. That is what I believe, but that there will be a case to answer for your actions in the next phase, call it judgement, heaven, whatever.

I have been studying Judaism a great deal in recent times, and have been thinking seriously about converting, or at least trying to live by Noahide principles. Torah speaks to me in a way which the New Testament or Pauline Epistles never have, and I thoroughly enjoy reading the words and works of Jonathan Sacks especially, who combines a deep faith with reason, humour, realism, and the stark truth that we can only aspire to be the best we can within the confines of human nature, and that is the real message of God. The Almighty has provided us, through direct interventions, with a template of how to live our lives, and I appreciate the fact that Judaism, above Christianity, deals with the here and now, rather than with the afterlife.

We all have a choice in life. Follow the path of light, or that of darkness. Life is terribly hard for so many people, and I appreciate deeply the riches and happiness I enjoy, more so as I get older, and more deeply spiritual. It is my belief that mankind simply has to mature. In reality, many of our leaders actions are no better than those of warlords of times past, and Jewish texts deal with that history, consequences, and outcomes very directly. Far too many of us also still follow idiots in power, most of them vain and narcissistic, without any free will, or thoughts as to the consequences of our support, at all.

There will, hopefully, come a time when we can all live in peace and harmony, with riches and peace for all.

There.....I have finished on a nice Jon Anderson note

lazland wrote: I like the point made about God not wishing to create automatons, but humans with free will. <snip>

What’s hard for me to understand is why he would subject us to such misery. You could have free will in a universe without rape, war, mental illness, etc.

patrickq wrote: lazland wrote: I like the point made about God not wishing to create automatons, but humans with free will. <snip> What’s hard for me to understand is why he would subject us to such misery. You could have free will in a universe without rape, war, mental illness, etc.

He doesn't subject us to such misery. That is the point. We do it to ourselves.

Mental illness seems, to an extent, deserving of empathy. But, certainly I've met incredibly decent people who suffer from mental challenges, while I've encountered some really smart but extremely self centered people who are really lacking in the empathy department and have no diagnosed mental illness.

I just don't think you can lump mankind together when it comes to good and evil. I think each of us has, to an extent, a choice. I would agree that our tendencies may be towards the latter, but those tendencies may be overcome by following the conscience, which seems to be a gentle nudging from something and someplace difficult to define. Some would argue that it comes from God. There is also a difference in choosing to pursue good or evil as a way of life, and in making mistakes (sometimes, actions of evil - willful but regretted or unintentional) along the way.

Anyway, considering all of my thoughts on this forum, I try to show how my own rational thinking has brought me to a set of logical conclusions. If God exists, then ... Now, if I choose to believe in this creator God, the question becomes what religion is congruent with this philosophy of moral law? If I don't choose to believe, then I have to rationalize other explanations to justify the basis for moral law (good and evil) and conscience. Either avenue becomes a matter of faith.

We are imperfect mortal beings and hopelessly alone in the world (and we all live with the conscience of that inescapable human condition, more or less deeply ingrained, of course, it varies greatly)  - humbly believing there's an entity that personifies an ideal we should compare us to and try emulate, well, many of us can and do use that faith - of any flavor, choose one - to drive across this valley of tears the best we can (results may vary hahahha !!!)

Religions seem to be filled with half-truths and useless dogmas.

I think mainly because of miss-interpretations of the cryptic writings.  That and a control factor.

Gandhi once mentioned that he followed and saw no difference between Hindu scriptures, the Bible and the Koran.

I think that if Jesus, Muhammad, Krishna, Buddha and any other such masters sat around the table there wouldn’t be any arguments, only harmony. 

Now put their followers around that same table and they’ll be at each other’s throats