• 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!

Who is God ? or what are God's attributes ?

Inthedark

Member
It is truly fascinating to see all these opinions about the attributes of God in one thread. Just to throw another opinion in to the mix, what about Durkheim's assertion that we are Homo Duplex, two in one, the beast and the angel or more accurately the profane (common) and the sacred? The profane being the norm, the realm in which most of us live simply responding to our shallow wants and needs, with some individuals able to transcend by climbing the staircase to the sacred, and losing the "self" by circumnavigating the ego. Isn't this the reason for us creating God, to explain this phenomenon about our very nature?

Jonathan Haidt: Religion, evolution, and the ecstasy of self-transcendence | Video on TED.com

Is this why God has human attributes, because that God is a reflection of our higher selves?

:shrug:
 
Last edited:

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
From your views, has God ever appeared in physical form. You see from my understanding, God has no physical form whatsoever. Because things in physical form become limited, matter can be destroyed. (Note: I did not say mass. There is a difference.)

The metaphysical teachings in Hinduism delve into the concept that the Whole (God) or macrocosm (God) can be completely present within the parts of the Whole or within the microcosm. This is the nature of Spirit, as we understand it. Because of this, God can be completely within, present, aware etc. of everything at every time. For example, we believe that God is present within the heart (chakra) of every living entity. He is, in his complete self, present within each of us and acts as our guide (this is partly why Hindus emphasise looking within ourselves to find and know God rather than looking outward and externally).

Similarly, God can expand himself into infinite forms and each form is God, completely. This is why we worship the avatars as the same Personality.

And finally, this is why we do not see a problem with performing worship using statues or pictures. According to our scriptures and beliefs as presented as the word of God, He becomes fully present within the statue/sculpture or picture for the sake of his devotee who wishes to perform personal service unto him out of love. It is a blessing to us that he appears for us this way. And indeed, such personal service provides incredible joy and love and deeper connection with Him (I say this from observation and personal experience).

It is a strange thing for a Hindu to be told that God cannot be fully present in a form. For us, this seems to be placing limitations on God's power and ability. It is to strip Spirit of its essence and make it just like matter, which it is not. We truly believe that the infinite exists within every atom. The Realised person understands this completely.
 

Inthedark

Member
The metaphysical teachings in Hinduism delve into the concept that the Whole (God) or macrocosm (God) can be completely present within the parts of the Whole or within the microcosm. This is the nature of Spirit, as we understand it. Because of this, God can be completely within, present, aware etc. of everything at every time. For example, we believe that God is present within the heart (chakra) of every living entity. He is, in his complete self, present within each of us and acts as our guide (this is partly why Hindus emphasise looking within ourselves to find and know God rather than looking outward and externally).

Similarly, God can expand himself into infinite forms and each form is God, completely. This is why we worship the avatars as the same Personality.

And finally, this is why we do not see a problem with performing worship using statues or pictures. According to our scriptures and beliefs as presented as the word of God, He becomes fully present within the statue/sculpture or picture for the sake of his devotee who wishes to perform personal service unto him out of love. It is a blessing to us that he appears for us this way. And indeed, such personal service provides incredible joy and love and deeper connection with Him (I say this from observation and personal experience).

It is a strange thing for a Hindu to be told that God cannot be fully present in a form. For us, this seems to be placing limitations on God's power and ability. It is to strip Spirit of its essence and make it just like matter, which it is not. We truly believe that the infinite exists within every atom. The Realised person understands this completely.

This reminds me somewhat of Process Theory. Alfred Whitehead and I think to some extent Carl Jung talked about approaching matter from a different perspective than the Newtonian and your post reminded me of it. Here is a link you might be interested in Madhuri....

Why I became a Panexperientialist

:)
 

Rational_Mind

Ahmadi Muslim
The metaphysical teachings in Hinduism delve into the concept that the Whole (God) or macrocosm (God) can be completely present within the parts of the Whole or within the microcosm. This is the nature of Spirit, as we understand it. Because of this, God can be completely within, present, aware etc. of everything at every time. For example, we believe that God is present within the heart (chakra) of every living entity. He is, in his complete self, present within each of us and acts as our guide (this is partly why Hindus emphasise looking within ourselves to find and know God rather than looking outward and externally).

Similarly, God can expand himself into infinite forms and each form is God, completely. This is why we worship the avatars as the same Personality.

And finally, this is why we do not see a problem with performing worship using statues or pictures. According to our scriptures and beliefs as presented as the word of God, He becomes fully present within the statue/sculpture or picture for the sake of his devotee who wishes to perform personal service unto him out of love. It is a blessing to us that he appears for us this way. And indeed, such personal service provides incredible joy and love and deeper connection with Him (I say this from observation and personal experience).

It is a strange thing for a Hindu to be told that God cannot be fully present in a form. For us, this seems to be placing limitations on God's power and ability. It is to strip Spirit of its essence and make it just like matter, which it is not. We truly believe that the infinite exists within every atom. The Realised person understands this completely.

I see it this way. God can do what he wills. It would be against him being infinite to come into a physical form. A physical form would actually make him limited. So the difference might be that your concept of God is that God can and will do anything?
 

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
I see it this way. God can do what he wills. It would be against him being infinite to come into a physical form. A physical form would actually make him limited. So the difference might be that your concept of God is that God can and will do anything?

The difference is in the 'science'. The Hindu/Vedic science explains that God can be manifest in infinite forms at the same time and each form is the complete and infinite Being, without loss of attributes. To say that God is not capable of taking form without losing attribute is to say his power is not infinite. It would be a contradiction.
 

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
This reminds me somewhat of Process Theory. Alfred Whitehead and I think to some extent Carl Jung talked about approaching matter from a different perspective than the Newtonian and your post reminded me of it. Here is a link you might be interested in Madhuri....

Why I became a Panexperientialist

:)

Carl Jung seemed to have Eastern philosophical influences. Thanks for the link
 

Rational_Mind

Ahmadi Muslim
The difference is in the 'science'. The Hindu/Vedic science explains that God can be manifest in infinite forms at the same time and each form is the complete and infinite Being, without loss of attributes. To say that God is not capable of taking form without losing attribute is to say his power is not infinite. It would be a contradiction.

So if one complete form is destroyed then? Also maybe you should reconsider what infinite and complete are. If God is complete in one form then how is he infinite. By that statement God has immediately become finite. The prior problem still remains that God can be limited in one form when he claims to have no limit.
 

Madhuri

RF Goddess
Staff member
Premium Member
So if one complete form is destroyed then?

What complete form can be destroyed? God is Spirit, and no form if His is ever 'destroyed'.

Also maybe you should reconsider what infinite and complete are. If God is complete in one form then how is he infinite. By that statement God has immediately become finite. The prior problem still remains that God can be limited in one form when he claims to have no limit.

I know that this is a complex topic and one that should take years to form some understanding of, so it is no surprise that you ask this question after my other responses and perhaps will still be confused after this response.

Any 'form' of God contains the infinite. The infinite exists everywhere and in everything. You are not expected to intellectually understand this. God and reality is inconceivable to the human mind, which is clouded by ignorance. The Realised person understands it through experience, not mental speculation.

The follow picture is a depiction from one story regarding the avatar Krishna. When his mother looks into his mouth, she was engulfed by the image of the entire universe there within. This story is one of many that attempt to explain that all of existence resides within the 'form' or any form of God.

krish_open_mouth.jpg


We are stumped by such ideas, because we think that matter and the laws of the material universe are the all-pervading reality. But Veda explains that matter is simply one aspect of God's power but Spirit is the ultimate reality and Spirit works quite differently than matter. And so based in the laws of Spirit, it is possible for the Whole (God, the infinite) to be present within its parts (the seemingly finite things).
 

fishy

Active Member
Hey Rational, if I draw a picture of the Grand Canyon (as if :biglaugh: ) and then I tear that picture up; have I destroyed any part of the Grand Canyon?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Divine justice would be god's justice. So god required the human sacrifice of a perfect human in order that he forgive the sin of Adam.
Adams sin will never be forgiven.

It is the sins of Adams offspring that God forgives... the reason being that we have been 'subjected' to sin, whereas Adam chose it.

Romans 8:20 For the creation (Adams offspring) was subjected to futility, not by its own will but through him (Adam) that subjected it, on the basis of hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption

Even after god was adamant that sacrifice of any sort was an abomination to him. That's a very interesting point don't you think? To precis god's position; sacrifice of anything at all is an abomination, but I demand the sacrifice of a perfect human. Do you see any conflict there?

no I dont. It was man who chose to offer animal sacrifices in the hope that they could atone for their sins. But God would not accept an animal sacrifice as an atonement because the value of an animal does not equate to a human life. Thats why he didnt want them....they could not redeem mankind. Mankind needed an equivalent to Adam...a perfect human.

God had already stated right at the beginning of Adams sin that he would provide an atonement for sin....HE would provide it....he never expected us to provide an atonement.
See Genesis 3:15
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Yes, I would agree with that .. the problem is, that this 'figure of speech' leads people into believing that Jesus (peace be with him), is God incarnate! :facepalm:


trinitarians use that... but not all christians are trinitarians.

I personally dont know how a 'son' can mean a 'father' ....that is just twisted illogical reasoning just as Jesus said some would twist the scriptures, thats what they are doing.
 

fishy

Active Member
Adams sin will never be forgiven.

It is the sins of Adams offspring that God forgives... the reason being that we have been 'subjected' to sin, whereas Adam chose it.

Romans 8:20 For the creation (Adams offspring) was subjected to futility, not by its own will but through him (Adam) that subjected it, on the basis of hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption



no I dont. It was man who chose to offer animal sacrifices in the hope that they could atone for their sins. But God would not accept an animal sacrifice as an atonement because the value of an animal does not equate to a human life. Thats why he didnt want them....they could not redeem mankind. Mankind needed an equivalent to Adam...a perfect human.

God had already stated right at the beginning of Adams sin that he would provide an atonement for sin....HE would provide it....he never expected us to provide an atonement.
See Genesis 3:15
Yes, so from the very beginning, god knew that the punishment he bestowed on all of mankind was unjust and needed to be rescinded, he then piled evil upon on injustice by having mankind murder his son as a blood sacrifice to himself, in order that he rescind his unjust punishment. Hooray for god :)
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
I would not have any problem understanding and agreeing with that concept of 'Son of God' (figurative). Anyone close to God, would be a Son of God in that sense. However, if that is the case, why is Jesus(pbuh) (the Son of God' different from all the other 'Son of God'/Messengers mentioned in the bible ?

The reason why he is different is because he was the very first creation of God. He is the first angel God made. They existed together alone for perhaps eons of time before other angels were created. The book of proverbs describes his close relationship with Allah in Proverbs (written by King Solomon)
Proverbs 8:22 “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. ...30 then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time,

This angel of God is called the 'firstborn' by the Apostle Paul, and all other angles were created 'through' him and its for that reason that he is the 'chief' or Archangel in heaven.
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible,

Because of his high station, God has placed him as the head of the heavenly kingdom...and all the heavenly angels (including Gabriel) are led by Jesus in the service of the Creator.

You are contradicting yourself - read that again "those messengers were usually imperfect humans who eventually died" . I think at least according to your belief - Jesus(pbuh) died on the Cross, right ? Did Jesus explicitly state (clear and unambiguous) anywhere in the Bible that he would die to save mankind from sin ? I would expect that if that was his main mission in the world - he would at least do that.

unlike other humans, Jesus lived as a heavenly angel BEFORE he came to earth as a man. You know that Mary became pregnant by holy spirit (Gods power)... this means Jesus did not have a human father....he was more then human. His purpose was to be born in the flesh and die in our behalf. He was to pay the price of sin for every man woman and child. When he did that, he had accomplished his task, and thereafter he was restored to heaven as a powerful angel where he had originally been.

So he was nothing like any other prophet or messenger. He was Gods heavenly angel....the one through whom all things came into existence including us.

In your Quran, you know that God speaks in plural.... "We sent our messenger..." why? Allah is with his firstborn....its the same in the bible
Genesis 1:26 And God went on to say: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness
God speaks in the plural because he is not alone....his firstborn son is with him

"Divine justice required a perfect human life to save mankind" - did Jesus(pbuh) say that anywhere in the Bible ?
Yes. And not only Jesus, but also the prophets mentioned this too:

Matthew 20:17 Being now about to go up to Jerusalem, Jesus took the twelve disciples off privately and said to them on the road: 18 “Look! We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man will be delivered up to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death...and the third day he will be raised up.”

Matthew 20:28 Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”

Isaiah 53:5 But he was being pierced for our transgression; he was being crushed for our errors. The chastisement meant for our peace was upon him, and because of his wounds there has been a healing for us...

11 Because of the trouble of his soul he will see, he will be satisfied. By means of his knowledge the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people; and their errors he himself will bear

Isaiah 53:12 '... due to the fact that he poured out his soul to the very death, and it was with the transgressors that he was counted in; and he himself carried the very sin of many people, and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose


What about the following statements in the Bible then ? So is God saying Justice means one thing for the mankind and another thing for Himself ?

[Ezekiel 18:20] “The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.”

And:

[Deuteronomy 24:16] “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”

Ezekiel 18:20 does not apply to God or Jesus...it applies to sinful mankind. We are not punished with death because of Adams sin...we die because we commit our own sins.

The entire purpose of the Mosaic Law was to teach us this vital truth. If we sin, we will die.
If you look around the earth, you surely know that every single person born will die...why do they die? Because we are all breakers of Gods moral laws. When we break physical laws, we suffer or can die. For example, the law of gravity must be respected and obeyed or it can kill us. If we step off a high ledge we will come crashing to the ground because the law of gravity cannot be broken.

its the same with Gods universal moral laws. If we break them, we will die as Ezekiel 18:20 clearly states. "the soul that is sinning, it itself will die"
And the mosaic laws were to show us the very immoral acts that bring forth death. Rebelliousness was death by stoning, disobedience to parents was death by stoning, Murder was death by stoning....etc etc etc. These moral standards, if we break them, will bring forth death.

the mosaic law was Gods way of showing mankind why we are dieing....it was only applicable to the Isrealites for a set time until the Messiah arrived, then it would be fulfilled because the Messiah would carry our sins so that we could be forgiven for sin and attain everlasting life through him. (this is side point but this is the reason why Christians do not adhere to the mosaic law)

God is not going to hold sin against us and demand the death penalty anymore....he wants mankind to live forever....he wants death to be done away with for good. Through submission to his moral laws and standards, and through faith in Jesus Christ, we can attain to such a future. Sin gives us death, but Jesus gives us life.

Since you brought up Adam(pbuh). According to your example of 'perfect human' Adam(pbuh) would be more of a perfect example since he was born of no father and no mother, whereas Jesus(pbuh) was born of a human mother.

Adam and Jesus are equivalents in that they were both created/born perfect. Being perfect meant they were without defects at their creation. In Adams case, he misused his freewill and chose to become disobedient to God...he did not submit himself to Gods will. But Jesus chose to fully summit himself to God...even in the face of death and bitter persecution he chose martyrdom because he was a true muslim. Adam was not a true muslim though...he was rebellious and under your law, would have been stoned for apostasy.
 
Last edited:

fishy

Active Member
Proverbs 8 follows Proverbs 7 where Solomon is impricating his sone to take heed of SHE who is Wisdom and SHE speaks at the beginning in Proverbs 8, after Solomon decrying the young man who went with the harlot of flattery. Where is Jesus mentioned? It was Solomon speaking either himself or as Wisdom in the guise of an imaginery woman?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Proverbs 8 follows Proverbs 7 where Solomon is impricating his sone to take heed of SHE who is Wisdom and SHE speaks at the beginning in Proverbs 8, after Solomon decrying the young man who went with the harlot of flattery. Where is Jesus mentioned? It was Solomon speaking either himself or as Wisdom in the guise of an imaginery woman?

Jesus is Gods wisdom in the flesh.
John calls him 'the Word' who was 'in the beginning with God'

This passage of scripture is not about Gods attribute of Wisdom....he has 3 other attributes which are not mentioned - 'love/justice/power'
Why would he single out wisdom as the one attribute he was 'especially fond of'

The scriptures tell us that Gods most powerful attribute is 'love'....it says that 'God is Love'
So if God singles out his attribute of wisdom as his most precious....why do the scriptures say that 'God is love' and not 'God is Wisdom' ???
 

fishy

Active Member
Jesus is Gods wisdom in the flesh.
John calls him 'the Word' who was 'in the beginning with God'

This passage of scripture is not about Gods attribute of Wisdom....he has 3 other attributes which are not mentioned - 'love/justice/power'
Why would he single out wisdom as the one attribute he was 'especially fond of'

The scriptures tell us that Gods most powerful attribute is 'love'....it says that 'God is Love'
So if God singles out his attribute of wisdom as his most precious....why do the scriptures say that 'God is love' and not 'God is Wisdom' ???
Solomon describes WISDOM as a SHE. You are supplying interpretations for this passage that are quite simply untenable. It is the raison detre of your faith. Your's is the only bible "translation" that uses the name Jehovah. Your founder felt that it was a more accurate "translation" than all legitimate translations and miraculously he found unnamed translators who actually agreed with him. Proverbs 7&8 can in no way be construed as referring to Jesus, unless you have an agenda to make them so. When did Jesus become a SHE?
 

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
Who can be better than GOD to explain who He is ? As Allah(GOD) says in the Holy Qur'an:

I don't think the Quran knows anything more about God that I do. I've spent my adult life chasing God and have paid attention not only to Quranic claims about God but also to every usage of the word 'God' that I've ever heard. I've also spoken the word 'God' a whole lot. Some consider me obsessed with God.

So over the years, I've built up an opinion about the nature of God.

I think God is a concept more like 'justice' than like 'elephant.' There is no actual Being or Object which is God. There is only a high-level concept, like justice, which humans like to argue about.

I'd be glad to discuss the meaning of 'God' with you, but I'm guessing we may be too far apart in our conceptions for that to be a useful endeavor.
 

Rational_Mind

Ahmadi Muslim
Hey Rational, if I draw a picture of the Grand Canyon (as if :biglaugh: ) and then I tear that picture up; have I destroyed any part of the Grand Canyon?

It is not related to the picture. The Grand Canyon can be destroyed. Since we already know what it looks like we don't really need a picture, we may have seen it. The point is that whatever can be put into a picture, it (THE OBJECT OR THING) can be theoretically destroyed. Let me know if this is wrong. But a lot of my teachers and professors have brought this to the table especially in chemistry topics. I can understand if it is hard to understand, some people just can't understand the most simple concepts or intentionally pick up something their intellect can handle for fun.
 
Last edited:

fishy

Active Member
It is not related to the picture. The Grand Canyon can be destroyed. Since we already know what it looks like we don't really need a picture, we may have seen it. The point is that whatever can be put into a picture, it (THE OBJECT OR THING) can be theoretically destroyed. Let me know if this is wrong. But a lot of my teachers and professors have brought this to the table especially in chemistry topics. I can understand if it is hard to understand, some people just can't understand the most simple concepts or intentionally pick up something their intellect can handle for fun.
Now how did I know that this would be your response, I actually left it open for that. Sorry mods.
Well lets say Allah gave me a vision of one of the alien creations he created on another world 10million light years away and I drew a representation of that vision and then tore that picture up. Would I have destroyed any part of that alien? That alien is not as far as any of us is concerned a thing, well except Allah and me. So you see that if you envisage a picture of Allah, it is only between you and Allah whether or not that picture is real. How can destroying said picture have any influence on Allah at all?
 
Last edited:
Top