Philosophy Now Forum

:::::::sigh:::::::: Troglodytes

Reflex wrote::::::::sigh:::::::: Troglodytes

Sounds like a chocolatey treat. Are you calling me a chocolatey treat?

sthitapragya wrote:

attofishpi wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:A God who is both man and God at once.

An impersonal God. I would add that the impersonal God would be so detached from the functioning of the world that though He can judge, He would absolutely not under any circumstances which would effectively mean that He cannot judge.

An interventionist God or Gods. This is because the impersonal God seems more or less the same entity in most religions. ( I haven't read about all of them so I cannot say for sure). However there are a multitude of interventionist Gods.

A God that cannot be known.

So you think all the above are the forms in which a God (with the ability of reincarnation) could logically exist?

Just thought I would add to the list.

I am talking about how God could logically exist. I am talking about its\our genesis - not so much about what it does. I have re-edited to the OP to reflect this.

GOD:-
1. A floating man in space that states "Let there be light."
2. An entity that is 'beyond' time and space and creates our universe. - perhaps from a multiverse - our universe being created from another.
3. An entity that is created by intelligent species - even by man aeons ago - to deal and judge with the onset of entropy.
4. An entity that formed its own intelligence from the chaos of the early universe and coerced matter to form Earth and us.

attofishpi wrote:
GOD:-
1. A floating man in space that states "Let there be light."
2. An entity that is 'beyond' time and space and creates our universe. - perhaps from a multiverse - our universe being created from another.
3. An entity that is created by intelligent species - even by man aeons ago - to deal and judge with the onset of entropy.
4. An entity that formed its own intelligence from the chaos of the early universe and coerced matter to form Earth and us.

Oh okay. And when I look at my list, you have actually essentially covered all of them anyway. So I really was not adding anything. Except for Jesus who I believe is not covered by the 4 you listed.

God's conceived in the mind. That's the logic of Gods existence. God is not an entity, but a concept.

Dalek Prime wrote:God's conceived in the mind. That's the logic of Gods existence. God is not an entity, but a concept.

God manifests all matter - that is our mind - and all reality.

Just from > 19yrs of experience of 'IT'.

sthitapragya wrote:

attofishpi wrote:
GOD:-
1. A floating man in space that states "Let there be light."
2. An entity that is 'beyond' time and space and creates our universe. - perhaps from a multiverse - our universe being created from another.
3. An entity that is created by intelligent species - even by man aeons ago - to deal and judge with the onset of entropy.
4. An entity that formed its own intelligence from the chaos of the early universe and coerced matter to form Earth and us.

Oh okay. And when I look at my list, you have actually essentially covered all of them anyway. So I really was not adding anything. Except for Jesus who I believe is not covered by the 4 you listed.

Sure - Jesus is an interesting quirk.

attofishpi wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:God's conceived in the mind. That's the logic of Gods existence. God is not an entity, but a concept.

God manifests all matter - that is our mind - and all reality.

Just from > 19yrs of experience of 'IT'.

And I say 'he' doesn't. 'He' is a concept.

Dalek Prime wrote:

attofishpi wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:God's conceived in the mind. That's the logic of Gods existence. God is not an entity, but a concept.

God manifests all matter - that is our mind - and all reality.

Just from > 19yrs of experience of 'IT'.

And I say 'he' doesn't. 'He' is a concept.

An i dont say 'he'.

attofishpi wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

attofishpi wrote:
GOD:-
1. A floating man in space that states "Let there be light."
2. An entity that is 'beyond' time and space and creates our universe. - perhaps from a multiverse - our universe being created from another.
3. An entity that is created by intelligent species - even by man aeons ago - to deal and judge with the onset of entropy.
4. An entity that formed its own intelligence from the chaos of the early universe and coerced matter to form Earth and us.

Oh okay. And when I look at my list, you have actually essentially covered all of them anyway. So I really was not adding anything. Except for Jesus who I believe is not covered by the 4 you listed.

Sure - Jesus is an interesting quirk.

Actually even Krishna falls into more or less the same category, but I am sure a lot of people here will object to the comparision, so I didn't bring it up. . In fact, Krishna is even more complex because he is an incarnation of God who is a manifestation(not incarnation) of God.

sthitapragya wrote:

attofishpi wrote:Sure - Jesus is an interesting quirk.

Actually even Krishna falls into more or less the same category, but I am sure a lot of people here will object to the comparision, so I didn't bring it up. . In fact, Krishna is even more complex because he is an incarnation of God who is a manifestation(not incarnation) of God.

Ok. So how did Krishna suffer and did he\she advise any reason. Educate me -please.

attofishpi wrote: An i dont say 'he'.

Okay, don't then. But I've come to the realization that there are two basic things we know that one can build on from philosophy, and that is, there are things, and there is thought. And without thought, those things matter not a bit.

Dalek Prime wrote:

attofishpi wrote: An i dont say 'he'.

Okay, don't then. But I've come to the realization that there are two basic things we know that one can build on from philosophy, and that is, there are things, and there is thought. And without thought, those things matter not a bit.

Sure - but i know that things and matter are thought and it matters more than a bit.

attofishpi wrote:

sthitapragya wrote:

attofishpi wrote:Sure - Jesus is an interesting quirk.

Actually even Krishna falls into more or less the same category, but I am sure a lot of people here will object to the comparision, so I didn't bring it up. . In fact, Krishna is even more complex because he is an incarnation of God who is a manifestation(not incarnation) of God.

Ok. So how did Krishna suffer and did he\she advise any reason. Educate me -please.

Krishna didn't suffer at all. From the origin point of view, he is similar to Jesus in that Krishna too is an incarnation of God. He's uniqueness is supposed to be that he lived a life of a king and was still completely detached from the world and therefore his views were supposedly never subjective but always objective. ( I have no idea how that works. Just telling you as it is). He being God was omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience but curbed these powers to appear human most of the time. He is known essentially for having said what is in the Bhagwat Gita to Arjun, a warrior who refused to fight just before the greatest battle in Hindu mythology. So Krishna explained all the concepts like karma, atman, yagna, God, re-birth, the soul, its properties etc etc and even showed Arjun God's true form which rejuvenated Arjun to fight and the war was won.

And he was definitely different from Jesus because he said that tolerating injustice was a bigger sin than the injustice itself.

His is not an immaculate conception but God entered his mother's womb and he had a maternal uncle who was out to kill him. Very interesting stories attached to him.

attofishpi wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:

attofishpi wrote: An i dont say 'he'.

Okay, don't then. But I've come to the realization that there are two basic things we know that one can build on from philosophy, and that is, there are things, and there is thought. And without thought, those things matter not a bit.

Sure - but i know that things and matter are thought and it matters more than a bit.

Well, I'm not certain matter is thought, though consciousness only manifests as a product of our matter. As to mattering, only thought can give 'matter' to matter. So, what can matter, if there's no thought to give it any concern?