Topic: On the definition of ‘god’
jeanc200358's photo
Tue 05/22/07 04:27 PM
Abra, we Christians don't think that God is a "separate entity in the
sky," either.

jeanc200358's photo
Tue 05/22/07 04:32 PM
Ely, your intellectual point of view is fascinating, especially since
you are so young!

Thanks for your posts; they are very well expressed.

drinker

Abracadabra's photo
Tue 05/22/07 04:41 PM
Ely wrote:
“Rather than running to attack my beliefs every time your own are
attacked, why don't you ever attempt to defend your own?”

I don’t recall running to attack your beliefs.

And I have no need to defend my own.

I’m merely attempting to share my view of a non-egotistical god with
anyone who might be interested. Obviously you are not interested.

My view of god naturally conflicts with the Christian view of god and
always will because I simply don’t view god as being a judgmental
egotistical entity.

This is why I gave the ‘definition’ that I gave. It was merely an
attempt (a feeble attempt I’ll confess) to try to convey how I view god.
It wasn’t ‘my’ definition by the way, I got it from a web dictionary.

But I can’t even state my belief without Christians jumping on it,
because just to state that god is non-egotistical is to automatically
denounce the egotistical God of the Christians. There’s just no way
around it.

There’s just nothing I can do about that. I can’t make this
fundamental (and all-important) difference go away.

I just don’t view god as a jealous judgmental ego in the sky. In
short, I don’t buy into Christianity.

So anything else that I say is going to sound “anti-Christian”.

I can’t help that. That’s just the way it is.

The only way I could not sound “anti-Christian’ is to agree with
Christianity, and I’m not about to do that.

Abracadabra's photo
Tue 05/22/07 04:43 PM
Sheila wrote:
"Abra, we Christians don't think that God is a "separate entity in the
sky," either."

Have you read the Bible at all Sheila?

Milesoftheusa's photo
Tue 05/22/07 04:50 PM
yes he is
Isa 40:21-22

21 Have you not known?
Have you not heard?
Has it not been told you from the beginning?
Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers ,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
NKJV
Miles

scttrbrain's photo
Tue 05/22/07 05:07 PM
The Bible clearly states that there will be many religions, both old and
new. That there will be an imposter who will come and lead all that are
weak to their destiny. For they know not their true God (Jesus). That an
imposter will walk the earth claiming to be Him. Many will follow,
believing and succumming to his words, not knowing that they are
destined to hell. Becuase if they truly knew the real God, they would
know the true Jesus. The anti christ will be a friend to a pope who will
hold an office a short time and change rules and beliefs.
We must hold true to our goodness and loves. We must live well in order
to hope for salvation.

Kat

scttrbrain's photo
Tue 05/22/07 05:09 PM
Hi Sheila!

Thanks miles.
Kat

AdventureBegins's photo
Tue 05/22/07 05:28 PM
You have a point miles.

For though He is all things yet is he also beyond all things that move
and are closed within the cycles of this reality.

Redykeulous's photo
Tue 05/22/07 06:58 PM
Hi All, I just landed.

This view that Abra has set forth and then further defended is,
amazingly, a very similiar view with many others that I have known.
Like myself, those others, have gone through no small series of thought
processes and events to get to this 'theory'.

There is only one difference that I can see between Abra's view and and
my own is this;

I never felt there was a 'reason' or a particular thought process behind
the formation, creation of our universe and all it embellishes.

The act or action that began the series of events that led to the
universe as it is today, was set in motion by something totally unknown
- sometimes it is called the Big Bang theory.

But once started, there was a matrix, if you will. That formed
immediately. That matrix was to include the guidelines, or to become
what we refer to, as the nature of 'of the thing'.

This means that everything falls into some 'natural' course. Whether it
is the spinning of planets, the star that is nova, or how the material
of this universe acts upon meeting and joining other material - animals,
plants etc.

Since there really is no god overseeing all this (MY POINT OF VIEW
ONLY), there will naturally be inconsistancies. Things that happen that
we don't understand. Occurances that seem to make no sense or have
logic or reason. Even a matrix is subject to change from outside
forces. And this universe is contained. Meaning outside forces do
exist.

So while I understand Abra's theory, the wholeness and oneness of the
universe, he sees 'it' this wholeness as god. I do not, it is just a
matrix that sets the basic rules of natural law within our universe.
This matrix is by IT'S nature, the thing that separates us from other
universes.

I was so thrilled to see you post all this Abra, I honestly did not
realize your comprhension of things was so similiar to my own.

TheLonelyWalker's photo
Tue 05/22/07 07:41 PM
James if you were a christian, and u would able to apply all your
science and knowledge from the christian point of view, it would be
excelent.
But still i consider you one of the wisest here.
i would share my christian heaven with u, so I'll spend eternity
learning from u

Abracadabra's photo
Tue 05/22/07 09:53 PM
Thanks Miguel.

I’m not sure what religion would have to do with scientific views
though. I mean, if experiment and observation lead a person to a
conclusion that’s science. If instead, a person is lead by religious
beliefs, then it’s not science by simple definition.

jeanc200358's photo
Wed 05/23/07 09:45 AM
To state that God is "egotistical" is putting Him on the same level with
human beings, which is a totally skewed perception of Him, IMO.

wonderman37's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:02 AM
abra i am sick of all the garbage that comes out of your mouth you make
me sick

scttrbrain's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:18 AM
Whoa wonderman. What the heck? Kindness is key. Tolerance.
To show your God, is to be God-like. Please be careful. You did Him no
justice there.
Kat

wonderman37's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:28 AM
sorry scb but I am tired of him always running JESUS down without any
excuse he never have a answer

wonderman37's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:32 AM
i COULD UNDERSTAND IF HE HAS A VALID BELIEF AND HE POSTED IT AND
CHRISTIANS ATTACK HIM BUT I NEVER SEEN THAT

AdventureBegins's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:38 AM
Wonderman his beleif is valid to him.

We can not judge that belief based upon our beliefs. There is but one
judge in these matters.

Let be what is and hold to what is right for you.

The water in the midst of the storm will be calm for you and as you walk
it others may see that calm and want a piece of it.

wonderman37's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:43 AM
AB, He attacked me twice because I praised Jesus.

NOT BECAUSE i ATTACKED HIM PERSONALLY

Abracadabra's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:50 AM
Sheila wrote:
“To state that God is "egotistical" is putting Him on the same level
with human beings, which is a totally skewed perception of Him, IMO.”

I personally don’t believe that god is ‘egotistical’ either. However,
I’m just going by the Bible’s depiction of God. That God himself
proclaims that he is a jealous God and that we shall have no other gods
before him. He has self-proclaimed to have the emotion of jealousy
which is an egotistical emotion (no need to compare it with being
human).

Moreover, the whole picture that he sits on a throne in heaven and rules
over everyone expecting them to bow down and worship only him whilst he
passes judgment on all of them places him in a ‘egotistical’ role.

By ‘egotistical’ I simply mean that he thinks of himself as a completely
separate entity who deserves to be worshipped and served by all of the
imperfect spirit that he has created. Individual spirit that are also
retain their egotistical identities.

Please keep in mind here that I am using the term ‘egotistical’ simple
to mean ‘an individual entity’. There is nothing necessary wrong with
being an ‘egotistical’ entity. It simply means that the entity has a
‘self’ that is distinct and separate from everything else.

But the picture painted of the God in the Bible is definitely a picture
of an ‘egotistical’ God. And entity that has a ‘self’ and can exist as
a separate entity in its own right.

There can be no question that the Christian God is an egotistical God.
I’m pretty sure that even theologians will agree with this. The picture
of God painted in the Bible pretty much demands it. I don’t see how you
can avoid this conclusion whilst retaining the Bible as the solitary
description of God. It’s just not possible. The Bible paints a vivid
picture of God being a separate entity in it’s own right.

And this is what I mean by an ‘egotistical’ God.

The god I believe in is not egotistical at all. It has no stand-alone
separate existence. My god is everything. It’s a totally different
view from the idea of an egotistical godhead.

I believe that the egotistical view of God was indeed created by the
imaginations of men. They placed their own feelings of ‘individualism’
onto the God that they created in the Bible.

It’s not my intent to belittle god. On the contrary I believe that god
is so much more wonderful than the picture of God portrayed in the
Bible. I’m actually hoping to elevate people’s perception of god by
suggesting that the Bible’s depiction of god as being a conscious
separate judgmental ego is actually misleading.

I have no choice but to suggest this because there is simply no other
way to offer up an alternative view of god. A view that I sincerely
believe to be the correct view of god IMO.

jeanc200358's photo
Wed 05/23/07 10:53 AM
I understand what you mean, and I think that that's putting God in human
terms. I guess my counterpoint would be that, because He IS God, He has
the *right* to be "egotistical."

I'm on a strict deadline today and don't have time to elaborate right
now, so I hope that what I said is relatively clear.