serp777
Well-Known Member
You haven't defined "divine", so therefore we don't and can't know how to answer this question. Do you mean supernatural and magical? Because that has no evidence for it so most likely the answer is no.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Are You Divine?
- Thread starter Onyx
- Start date
serp777
Well-Known Member
Could you be any more vague? You need to define what "Divine Essence" is for this to make any sense. Furthermore, what constitutes divine needs to be clarified.
To be quite honest, I don't really give a damn if it makes sense to others. It only has to make sense to me.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Penguin, I have no further rebuttal that would be of use to continue a discussion, so I am going to bow out of that particular thread. I don't do it often, but I agree to disagree on the use of "god"; my use is fairly loose in favor of terms such as Ás, Vanir, and Jotun. In conventional speech I use Gods for familiarity, but the word itself has many applications to me.
That is eerily close to how I view the Gods, as well, which stems from what I was taught about Слово (Slovo). While слово is Russian for "word", in a spiritual sense it is the absolute essence of given things. For example, everything that is about a thunderstorm - the high winds, the torrential rain, the thunder and lightning - all are the slovo of the storm. Its slovo differs from that of a rainshower or plains winds, its thunder and lightning different from heat lightning or arcing electricity. But who speaks this slovo? Thor-Perun - the God of Thunder - is the voice that speaks the thunderstorm into being. He is the Slovo, the prime origin, of a thunderstorm's existence. It's presence is his presence, and his creation in this physical world as he interacts with it. And so it is with other Gods, and their Words that they speak into this reality. [/belief]
That is eerily close to how I view the Gods, as well, which stems from what I was taught about Слово (Slovo). While слово is Russian for "word", in a spiritual sense it is the absolute essence of given things. For example, everything that is about a thunderstorm - the high winds, the torrential rain, the thunder and lightning - all are the slovo of the storm. Its slovo differs from that of a rainshower or plains winds, its thunder and lightning different from heat lightning or arcing electricity. But who speaks this slovo? Thor-Perun - the God of Thunder - is the voice that speaks the thunderstorm into being. He is the Slovo, the prime origin, of a thunderstorm's existence. It's presence is his presence, and his creation in this physical world as he interacts with it. And so it is with other Gods, and their Words that they speak into this reality. [/belief]
I'm a bit of a "There is no spoon" person. I tend to think that by disbelieving in reality we can change it. Don't ask for a demonstration. That being said, disbelieving in reality might be risky; and I have seen people try and fail. Maybe they don't disbelieve as hard as they make it look. Anyway, things aren't what they seem, whatever that means.
That's very beautifully put and I'm with you on that. Thank you.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Yes, although I don't know it. Okay, I mean, I can mentally "know" it as a concept, but I don't *know* it as in truly comprehend it.
It's the latter that divides non-realized and realized. Hm. That sounds kind of obvious when I put it that way.
I need to better Hinduism. I'll default to my one saying "We are all god, we just don't know it yet."
It's the latter that divides non-realized and realized. Hm. That sounds kind of obvious when I put it that way.
I need to better Hinduism. I'll default to my one saying "We are all god, we just don't know it yet."
I say no. And if you insist that by the very ability to answer the question I am indeed divine, then we can logically conclude that some divine beings do not have the slightest clue of what they are. Or, they are lying.
Your call.
Ciao
- viole
I should apologize for this thread again. I was pretty hammered when I wrote the OP, and it doesn't really represent what I believe. It was interesting to read the responses anyway. I've quit drinking (hopefully for good), wish me luck.
james bond
Well-Known Member
It depends on the definition. If you are the creator of your world, then you are divine (small c and d). My world exists because I exist. Thus, I am its creator and divine. To take it a step further, one has to realize this and be in charge. Unlike God who can change others, we can only change ourselves which is still nice.
No need to apologize. The thread is fine.
Yes, call me Miss M.
Seriously, the Hindu greeting "namaste" (namaḥ+s+te) means "I bow to the divine in you".
There is another Sanskrit phrase, aham brahmāsmi, meaning "I am God". It's not as egotistical as it sounds, it means we are all divine.
SpiritQuest
The Immortal Man
God is the Tree of Life and you are a branch on the Tree. Life is divine and you are divine. The body-form is like a flower or a leaf that appears on the branch for a season and then it disappears. Flowers and leaves come and go again and again as the Tree grows and extends eternally. We are all connected.
Sha'irullah
رسول الآلهة
The very word god brings up so many conjurations but I would say that classically we can all apply the concept of god to mankind in this day of age where man has so much power. We have very godlike powers when our technology is considered but many lack the most vital essence of a god and that is the quality of being worshipped. The only people who have this are the prestigious and obviously leaders and celebrities come to mind but do not leave out the intellectuals.
One thing for us to consider is mankind's power to create gods out of seemingly nothing. I would even go so far to say that neopagans delegitimize themselves in that they worship gods of old, ancient, lost and antiquated cultures and not pursuing the aims of paganism, classical polytheism or witchcraft; which is the cultural and local systemization of religion.
One thing for us to consider is mankind's power to create gods out of seemingly nothing. I would even go so far to say that neopagans delegitimize themselves in that they worship gods of old, ancient, lost and antiquated cultures and not pursuing the aims of paganism, classical polytheism or witchcraft; which is the cultural and local systemization of religion.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe that is not true. God is life. The tree is only a provision of that life.
I believe this is metaphorically true. Jesus is the vine but of course He is not physically a vine. We are the branches but we are not physical branches. However the concept of a life force flowing from Jesus into us makes a lot of sense.
I believe there can be confusion in this statement. Physical life is not divine. Our spiritual lives are not divine but the Spirit of God is life.
I believe this is not naturally true but can become true by assumption.
Muffled
Jesus in me
Yes, call me Miss M.
View attachment 15777
Seriously, the Hindu greeting "namaste" (namaḥ+s+te) means "I bow to the divine in you".
There is another Sanskrit phrase, aham brahmāsmi, meaning "I am God". It's not as egotistical as it sounds, it means we are all divine.
I believe I would not serve a divinity that molests children and tortures people.
What divinity would that be?