• 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!

God's Attributes

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
With the goal of developing a clearer picture of what god is, I was wondering if theists could list a few of god's primary attributes/functions.

For example, is god omnipotent or limited in power? Is god singular or plural (gods)? Did god create makind/the universe/morality/etc.? Whatever you think the most significant of god's attributes are.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
You do realize that different people who believe in different God-concepts will give different answers, right? ;)

After all, my belief is that God (or rather, Brahman/Paramatman/Bhagavan) can be referred to in these three ways.

Brahman is the total aggregate of existence; the Supreme Reality.

Paramatman is that which the individual experiences when he or she experiences Brahman.

Bhagavan is the role model/idol by which that experience is achieved and maintained.

I promise you that other Hindus on the forum will disagree with me on that; those who belong to Gaudiya Vaishnavism would say that Bhagavan Krishna is the Supreme Reality, and that Brahman is just part of Krishna's power.
 
Last edited:

0zyzzyz0

Murphy's Law is the TOE.
My pardon first, in this, my first posting on this site. Mr Kigour Trout [I luv the monicker choice, btw) "was wondering if theists could list a few of god's primary attributes/functions." I must offer the disclaimer that I am not a theist. Do understand my comments then contextually as coming from that non theist perspective.
Gods, being the reflection of that which we subjectively perceive through the filters of our understanding and imaginnings, have attributed to them the attributes we attribute to them. [Pretty obvious tautology, eh?] "God", in the proper noun sense, it naturally follows, can only be to each of us what we personally understand it (him?) to be, but collectively can become definitively what we agree that it is, and may be permitted (given) whatever attributes we ascribe to our collective vision. A belief community, sharing enough agreement in their vision of what "God" is to them, can speak of their envisioned understand of God with a common understanding of it having specific agreed upon attributes, beginning with the agreed to attribute of being actually existent regardless of whether or not it is really existent. The term "God" for those in agreement then has ascribed meaning. What attributes are agreed to and ascribed varies between religious communities and subcommunities. The number and kinds of gods that may be believed in is not even limitted to the number of imaginers as it is possible in some instances for individuals to believe simultaneously in multiple gods, impossible gods or even inconsistent or evolving understandings of gods. Peole do tend to change their minds a lot about what they believe in - especially if they are inclined at all to openly giving the matter ongoing thought. It is when people identify specific characteristics and attributes and relationships and ascribe these to what they postulate to be God that their particular envisioned god becomes something defined by those characteristics, and becomes to them God or Allah or Thor or... It is then that their particular "God" may be referred to as a postulated ontological reality and may then be critically scrutinized for what it is or is not.

But, a Vonnegut's Kilgour Trout would attest, God is what we may find only when looking into a leak.
%)
 
Top