The Infinite All

RJM Corbet said:
They are the religions descended from Abraham: Islam, Judaism and Christianity, also Baha'i and Rastafarian and perhaps others.
Click to expand...
Yes, I did read that in my search for the term. I'm not sure what Thomas means though as he quoted my post about religions teach God is out there, away from you and that Abrahamic religions do not (am I missing something?). My understanding is that all of those teach God is a separate being.
 
It's in the nature of the finite and contingent, the diverse and the relative, that nothing can ever be perfect.

I stand by the notion everything is perfect and although there are various disagreements to this perfection is subjective. Hypothetically what is God's perfect world? I say God's perfect world and circumstances there in is as it should be in that particular moment otherwise it would not be.
 
I Am said:
My understanding is that all of those teach God is a separate being.
Click to expand...
Then your understanding is only partially correct and does not take into consideration that these religions are not monolithic.
 
I Am said:
I don't mean to make assumptions. It's my perspective of the portrayal of God in several versions of the old testament. Would you suggest a better word? I.e., God was angry or unhappy when we worshipped other deities?
Click to expand...
Rather I'd look at how the Tradition talks about God, then what a particular text says, to whom is it addressed, and so forth.

It's axiomatic that God in the Hebrew Scriptures is utterly transcendent. In Greek philosophical terms God is Absolute.

So how can we, and why do we, speak in anthropomorphic terms when we ascribe qualities to God? And the issue is compounded when we ascribe both positive and negative traits. In the end the process becomes contradictory.

In short, the language we use enables us to comprehend something of the incomprehensible. It poetic terms it sheds light into the Divine Darkness, but we should take care not to become too wedded to a literal reading of the words. Too narrow and too literal a reading can lead to 'hellfire and damnation' theology on the one hand, or an 'everything's cool and just as it should be' on the other. That I'm a sinner beyond redemption on the one hand, that I'm actually God on the other.

There is a reading of 'jealous', for example, that casts the word in a positive light, an unbreakable loyalty, the love of a parent for a child, for example. The delight of the father at the return of the prodigal son. But now we're into linguistic and lexical technicalities.

For me the point is, the literal reading will be tempered by a deeper, spiritual implication and metaphysical insight.
 
I Am said:
I'm not sure what Thomas means though as he quoted my post about religions teach God is out there, away from you and that Abrahamic religions do not (am I missing something?). My understanding is that all of those teach God is a separate being.
Click to expand...
My bad.

What I meant was, while God is 'out there', God is simultaneously present 'in' and 'to' — God is Transcendent and at the same time Immanent.

Psalm 145 says: "The LORD is nigh unto all them that call upon him, to all that call upon him in truth."
Islam says God is closer to you than your jugular vein.
Augustine said God knows you better than you know yourself.

We have much to learn about ourselves; God has seen it all before, all before the foundation of the world.
 
I think things can be perfect for what they are aimed at. A ball can fit into a hole perfectly, a sentence can be structured perfectly, a math question can be answered perfectly etc.

If the point of this existence is to highlight our imperfection then it is perfect for that purpose.. as are our imperfections.

Perhaps this is the perfection you are referring to, Knowself?

The truer definition of perfection, that which many attribute to God is only possible in such a being.

If we take a ball and look at the attributes it would require to be truly perfect;

It should be able to change size and material so it can be used for any purpose you would need a ball for.
It should be able to be used in any time and place it is needed.
It should know when and where it is needed.
That's Omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence right there.

I'm sure the list can be expanded on but the point I am making is that if God created a person that is perfect in the absolute sense then that person would end up a replica of God because that is what perfection is.

Kind of funny(to me) but this perfect being would then be imperfect as it would not serve the purpose of why we were created.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top