Do We All Worship the Same God?

[ashai]

As a Zoroastrian I would argue that all the "faces" of God are Mazda Ahura & that therefore worshippers of Allah, Yahweh, Krsna / Vishnu, the Horned God are worshipping Mazda AS LONG AS the religion leads folk to Good thoughts, Good Deeds and Good Words.

Kiwimac

Ushta Kiwimac

You are right , in my view also, however, I believe, its really better to express it in this way Mazda Ahura is All Good, moreover, He is the author of Good since His first choice manifested good on tho is plane. Thus all that is Good has its source in Mazda Ahura. if there is good in any religious doctrine ( Of course we are talking about good as Mazda Ahura defines good) its source its Mazda Ahura.

This goes hand in hand of the concept of Daena , which simply means Vision and thus all religions are Visions of How God is and must be to be God and what and how is His relationship and plans for His creation.

I think Pauk in Christianity shows quite a bit of Zoroastrian influence ( after all he was from Tarsus where there was a long and considerable Zarathushtrian presence) gets close to this concept when he admonishes in one of his epistles (if i am not mistaken) reaceive what 's good, ignore what's bad or someting quite like it.:bow:

Ushta te
Ashai

 

[Popeyesays]

"If Bob is adamant about worshiping a Triune God, and Frank is adamant about worshiping God as a non-Trinitarian Unity, do you think they worship the same God without realizing it? If they don't know what they're worshiping, how can anybody else be sure?"

How can anyone KNOW what God is or is not? I think the responsibility is to make the effort, not neccesarily to succeed. I think that exclusivist thinking (If you don't follow God as I picture Him, you're cast out!" violates the Gospel, the Torah, the Avestas, the Tao, Buddhism, Dharma, the Qur'an, the Bayan, the Aqdas and all the other revelations of God that seek to bring people together. To proclaim ONE of those text traditions is right and all others are wrong is a violation of the purpose of revelation - to bring mankind together. My opinion, of course, is formed by the sum total of my thoughts, as is everyone else. But I think that taking the "Jesus test" (By Their fruits ye shall know Them) to every proclamation is the right method.
When the fruits are prejudice, hatred, war, violence, genocide, rape, pillaging, and the denial of basic human rights to those one perceives as pariah makes ample testimony to the fruits of one's individual beliefs.

Regards,
Scott

 

[mehrosh]

Hi,All humans (who believe in God) Worship the same God, infact whatever one says the creator is there, and He created everyone, whether a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu or any other. And if this idea prevails throughout the nations of the world, then we can acheive Peace on the basis of this common term, One common God.

 

[Smoke]

"If Bob is adamant about worshiping a Triune God, and Frank is adamant about worshiping God as a non-Trinitarian Unity, do you think they worship the same God without realizing it? If they don't know what they're worshiping, how can anybody else be sure?"

How can anyone KNOW what God is or is not? I think the responsibility is to make the effort, not neccesarily to succeed. I think that exclusivist thinking (If you don't follow God as I picture Him, you're cast out!" violates the Gospel, the Torah, the Avestas, the Tao, Buddhism, Dharma, the Qur'an, the Bayan, the Aqdas and all the other revelations of God that seek to bring people together. To proclaim ONE of those text traditions is right and all others are wrong is a violation of the purpose of revelation - to bring mankind together.

Well, we're coming from a different perspective. To me, gods are mostly in our heads, and the god in Bob's head may have little or nothing in common with the god in Frank's head.

I don't believe that any text tradition is entirely right or entirely wrong, though I do think some are more right than others.

I do agree that there could be a splendid unity among religions if adherents of each could get beyond whatever is imaginary or metaphorical in their religions, and beyond their exclusivist attitudes, but then those are often the very things adherents have the strongest attachments to.

 

[windcarver]

I definately believe we all worship the same God. whatever you want to call it: God, Allah, Brahman, the One/the All, or whatever else I believe they are all different ways of worshipping the same deity.

 

[Super Universe]

Some call it agua, others wasser but is it not the same thing?

 

[kiwimac]

Ashai,

Ushta. You have put it nicely I think. As a follower of a non-abrahamic faith I did find the questions kind of slanted towards said Abrahamic faiths but still it was and is a useful question.

Kiwimac

 

[uumckk16]

If Bob is adamant about worshiping a Triune God, and Frank is adamant about worshiping God as a non-Trinitarian Unity, do you think they worship the same God without realizing it? If they don't know what they're worshiping, how can anybody else be sure?

Personally, I voted yes. I do believe they are worshipping the same God, maybe just as you said - without realizing it. The problem is that you're looking at this from an atheists' perspective (I think?). In order to answer the question "do we all worship the same God?", doesn't God's existence have to be assumed? If it is assumed that God in some form or other does exist, then I think Squirt's example of the President is very legitimate. The President is the President, no matter what my opinion of him is...and my opinion is not exactly the same as anybody else's, even if it may be similar to others'; it may be an incorrect opinion, but I'm entitled to it anyway. Isn't it the same with God, assuming God exists?

This is my absolute most favorite quote, and I think it applies to this thread: “God is like a mirror. The mirror never changes, but everybody who looks at it sees something different.” –Rabbi Harold Kushner :yes:

 

[BrandonE]

Personally, I voted yes. I do believe they are worshipping the same God, maybe just as you said - without realizing it. The problem is that you're looking at this from an atheists' perspective (I think?). In order to answer the question "do we all worship the same God?", doesn't God's existence have to be assumed? If it is assumed that God in some form or other does exist, then I think Squirt's example of the President is very legitimate. The President is the President, no matter what my opinion of him is...and my opinion is not exactly the same as anybody else's, even if it may be similar to others'; it may be an incorrect opinion, but I'm entitled to it anyway. Isn't it the same with God, assuming God exists?

I voted yes as well.

However, I think I see where MidnightBlue is coming from. If two people have extremely different views of god that they worship, but each think they are correct, instead of saying "oh, they're really worshipping the same god, but don't know it", it might be fairer to say that they're actually worshipping two entirely separate god constructs (which are based on their individual life experiences and what they've been taught), which may or may not share some characteristics with the ACTUAL god (if that exists). Maybe that's just semantics though.

I like that quote uumckk16.

 

[Katzpur]

Here's the way I see it...

Let's say we have two mothers on opposite sides of the world. Both of them believe in a Higher Power, although they refer to Him/Her/It by different names and would describe this Higher Power in very different terms from one another. Now both of these mothers have a sick child, and both appeal to their respective Higher Power to heal this child. I believe that the same Higher Power hears both prayers and chooses to respond by healing both children. The two women then offer prayers of thanks which, again, the same Higher Power hears and acknowledges. To me, that means they both worship the same Higher Power, even though one (or both) of them may not have an accurate understanding of His/Her/It's name and nature.

 

[Zephyr]

Other.
We worship different gods. My gods are not the same as those of the Christians or Hindus.

 

[uumckk16]

However, I think I see where MidnightBlue is coming from. If two people have extremely different views of god that they worship, but each think they are correct, instead of saying "oh, they're really worshipping the same god, but don't know it", it might be fairer to say that they're actually worshipping two entirely separate god constructs (which are based on their individual life experiences and what they've been taught), which may or may not share some characteristics with the ACTUAL god (if that exists). Maybe that's just semantics though.

Yeah, I get what MidnightBlue is saying. And it makes sense. My point was simply just that even the two entirely separate God constructs are still describing God, which I believe is separate from anything a human says. If that makes sense. That's why I said belief in God must be assumed. Because I believe in God, I don't believe anything a human says can change the true nature of God - what we say about God and the nature of God is just our personal interpretation, which may or may not be remotely correct. So if God is assumed to be real, then anyone who professes belief in God is worshipping God - they just might be describing him/her/it/whathaveyou inaccurately. Am I making sense, or am I just rambling?

I like that quote uumckk16.

Me too.

 

[BrandonE]

Yeah, I get what MidnightBlue is saying. And it makes sense. My point was simply just that even the two entirely separate God constructs are still describing God, which I believe is separate from anything a human says. If that makes sense. That's why I said belief in God must be assumed. Because I believe in God, I don't believe anything a human says can change the true nature of God - what we say about God and the nature of God is just our personal interpretation, which may or may not be remotely correct. So if God is assumed to be real, then anyone who professes belief in God is worshipping God - they just might be describing him/her/it/whathaveyou inaccurately. Am I making sense, or am I just rambling?

I went back and read this and your previous post more carefully, as well as MidnightBlue's post you were replying to. You are making sense, and now I'm pretty sure we were trying to say the same thing.

 

[Moses the God Archetype*]

:flower2: Hello my fellow brothers and sisters......i myself am a devotee of Hari Krsna who i view out of love and sound vedic knowlegde to be the supreme being (Vishnu himself)Bhagavad-Gita chapter 7 text 7-9om: Nothing whatsoever is superior to me, o winner of weath. Everthing rest on me like pearls strung on a thread, o best of the bharatas, I am the taste in water, the shine in the moon and the sun, the sacred syllable (OM) in all the Vedas, the sound in ether(space), and humanity's drive to achieve.I am the original fragrance in eath, the light in fire, the life in all living beings, and the austerity of ascetics.m: ) Thus thru him liberation in the trueist since of the word is achieved we belive.::flower2: