Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
No, Guinness is a much more logical explanation, at least after several pints of it.
-
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!
Do You Believe in God?
- Thread starter Sister Cyber
- Start date
No, Guinness is a much more logical explanation, at least after several pints of it.
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Sister Cyber
Member
He only has the ability to influence.
buddhist
Well-Known Member
If the definition of "God" is that which is supreme, then yes I believe (but not know) that it exists, and I call it the "All" instead (so as to avoid ideas and common ideas carried by the word "God").
The "All", in its nature of being the "highest", is therefore Infinite. Being infinite, it must logically encompass all that there is, including the universe as we know it, within itself. It cannot be logically separate from the universe, because it that were the case, it would not be infinite. Also - being infinite - it must logically contain all possible outcomes of every possible choice, so the multiverse exists within it. I daresay that it is the multiverse itself, and thus the "All" is equivalent to "Samsara" (in early Buddhist thought).
Since all possible outcomes of every possible choice (all which we perceive as time and space) already exists within itself, it must therefore be static and unchanging. Therefore it is unintelligent, has no "will", possesses no choice, and does not speak to or interact with mankind. It simply *is* - it simply exists. By definition of being infinite, all possible choices has already been realized within itself - there is nothing else left to do (from its perspective).
Within this "All" however, we have the illusion of separation. An infinite number of "individual beings" exists within the All, dwelling in the infinite number of multiverses and universes. These beings dwell in various planes of existence within their own unique universes. Some exist on higher planes (aka "heavens"), living in various degrees of bliss and power, possessing various lifespans reaching into the aeons) and might be called "deities" from our perspective; others exist on lower planes (such as the earthly/human/animal realms). These planes can be surmised to exist because of the Law of Rebirth and the Law of Kamma (Cause & Effect), both laws which we can witness in operation even in our daily lives.
Individual Beings who dwell in the highest planes within the "All" can be called the highest gods/deities, possessing the highest degrees of bliss, power, and span of life. But, in their very nature, they must have little to no interest in earthly life, being most similar to the "All" itself. Beings dwelling in the lower planes of which we might call the "heavens" would thus be considered the lowest gods/deities (e.g. angels, fairies, etc.), possessing far lower degrees of bliss, power, and span of life (but more than mankind), but are the most involved in earthly life, being far more alike to mankind than the "All".
Long story short, I believe in the Buddhist cosmology.
Last edited:
It is logically impossible that something can be "highest" and infinite at the same time. There is no "highest" and infinite any more than there is a "highest" number if you start to count one, two, three upwards.
Last edited:
How can something that is unintelligent and has no will and possesses no choice have a perspective?
buddhist
Well-Known Member
It has no perspective. I meant, from our perspective imposed upon its frame of reference.
"Highest" does not imply "infinite".
And "infinite" does not mean "encompassing all that there is". For instance, an infinitely long line still has zero volume.
buddhist
Well-Known Member
My use of the word "Infinite" is to refer to every possible dimension and potential.
Last edited:
Then "highest" REALLY doesn't imply what you're calling "infinite".
buddhist
Well-Known Member
Then I'm using the word "highest" in a different way than you are.
serp777
Well-Known Member
The fact that there are so many contradictory ideas about God and that everyone seems to have their own take on God's characteristics show that its very likely that nobody has any idea whatsoever on the truth about God. The most sensible position is to say you don't know. Nobody can likely know about God based on the vast differences between believers and the vast number of religious scams and falsehoods that have tricked billions.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe contradictions don't mean that both are false. It means only one is right. One could say no-one knows if there were no evidence but there is evidence.
So then what do you mean by "highest"?
Maybe to save time, you can tell us which words you are using in a normal way.
serp777
Well-Known Member
They just imply that there's a low probability that you got it right. It doesn't mean that only one is right. Its very possible that none could be right and all religions got it wrong. Or there might be some religion in the future thats the actual, true religion. You simply don't know enough to claim the truth of religion. If you do know enough and have enough evidence then you should write a world renowned report or get a nobel prize in literature.
THe muslims claim there's evidence and the Scientologists claim that there is evidence, but the question is whether its reliable and unbiased evidence based on science or very thorough history. And if its historical evidence there better be multiple, independent, unbiased parties that report on the event in question. Their stories also better be first hand account and they ought to be consistent with one another generally.
buddhist
Well-Known Member
highest: "the acme or culmination": http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/high
life.period
Member
God is one
Every country has one leader .
Is there is more than one they will fight for authority
World will not be organized because every one want to do different thing.
Jews believe god one .
Jesus said god is one not three
Jesus : " hear oh Israel god our Lord.God is one
Muslims believe god is one .
Jesus said : " father is greater than I "
No one is greater than god
He created us so how we can claim we are equal to him ..
We ask him if we are in need .
Some peopel may say we don't consider we equal to our president so then how could we be equal to the Lord of the world.
Islam ♡
blue taylor
Active Member
According to human beings, there are hundreds of gods in this world. Why is yours the only one that is real?
life.period
Member
Many gods are not god
Many gods are human being .
God is not human .
You don't worship person equal to you or something worthless .
Hinduism worshipping idol's " rock
That doesn't make sense
Worshipping what they made by their hands
They are worshipping who creatation who didn't create any thing .
Christian worshipping Jesus who is a Prophet human .
Jews who corrupt god words .
All religions corrupt god words and holly book they claim is holly not holly because it is human words not god except Qur'an.
This is not my words but their own.
I worship who can hear me
Help me when I fall in a problem
Last edited:
Every country only has one leader? That doesn't seem true.
Thinking to my own country, Canada, at least three and maybe four people (or more) could be considered the leader of the country in terms of power and authority.
Do you think they're all fighting for authority? I haven't seen this myself.
And as for gods, I would think that an infinitely powerful and wise god would have an infinite capacity to work with other infinitely powerful and wise gods. It seems to me that when you argue that your god couldn't play well with another god, you demean your god.