What you're looking for might be Paramarthika, and the avatars. If you're going to try to equate that with God and His manifestations, I would agree, with some conditions and qualifications, but you might get some resistance from @Aupmanyav.
From me also, if you're trying to assimilate his view or subordinate it to yours.
I changed my mind, Maybe those analogies can be helpful and not harmful, as long as you don't think of any one explanation as being the only right one and all others as being wrong. In my story, all of our understandings are wrong in some ways, and there isn't any one way of thinking that is the best for all purposes. There is only one way into God's kingdom and eternal life, but there isn't any one true and right way for us to think about it. That's what I'm saying about the Trinity. All of the analogies fail in some way, but each one fills in what is missing in some others. If you know enough about map projections to know that the best ones for navigation don't show the right sizes, shapes or distances, and that the best ones for sizes, shapes and distances are all different from each other, and that straight lines on one are curved on others, then maybe you can understand what I'm saying about our ways of thinking about the way to God's kingdom and eternal life, about the Trinity, and about Jesus being the brother of the servants and their Master and Lord at the same time.
Theology in the writings... how does that change what I said?
Trick question. On one hand you can argue "only G-d can judge"
By experience over ages, by concern for family, society and nation. That is how the laws of Torah, Bible and Qur'an also were made. Do you think that before the time of Moses societies did not have any laws?
What do you mean you don't think so? Nothing you said contraindicated anything I said.
That depends on what you mean by "the idea of the trinity." There are three somethings in the Bible who are called "God," and no two of them are the same person, but they are not three gods. The theologians didn't invent that. They only invented a name for it, and some ways of trying to explain it in terms of Greek and Roman philosophy.
Hunh?
But you are leaving out a vast, essential and vital part of Hinduism in that explanation. Even if you don't take it literally, don't you see any metaphorical value in it? Don't you think that it has anything to do with the value of Hinduism, and how it works for people? Do you think that all of that is nothing but useless baggage?
I understand all that, but alongside of that I think that in Hinduism the gods and the avatars, and some concept of ultimate reality play a role in that. Even if you don't believe in any of that, I think that you're well versed in the terminology, and that's what I was asking you about. If you don't tell me, I'll have to go and read about it in Wikipedia.By experience over ages, by concern for family, society and nation. That is how the laws of Torah, Bible and Qur'an also were made. Do you think that before the time of Moses societies did not have any laws?
".. the modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely mythical while also holding that "a Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in the southern Transjordan" in the mid-to-late thirteenth century BCE, .."
Moses - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Well, "The Indus Valley Civilisation was a Bronze Age civilisation in the northwestern regions of South Asia, lasting from 3300 BCE to 1300 BCE, and in its mature form from 2600 BCE to 1900 BCE." - Indus Valley Civilisation - Wikipedia
Do you think that Indus Valley civilization did not have any laws? There were societies much older to Indus valley. Think about the people of Gobekli Tepe (The settlement was inhabited from around 9500 BCE to at least 8000 BCE during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic - Göbekli Tepe - Wikipedia). Moses that way, is very recent.
The Abarahamic laws are the codification of the laws by particular societies in their time. Believing that a God dictated them is falsehood. The Hindu advantage is that it is possible to change them to suit the times.
What are you calling "science"? If it's the original reports of researchers, or what the researchers themselves think about it, that is not what I'm talking about, because that is not what people are calling "science" in public discussions. What people are calling "science" in public discussions is what journalists and various factions are saying that the science says. They are all contradicting each other, and each person chooses the source that's saying what they want to hear, to tell them "what science says."
I don't know how much you are aware of this, but the usefulness and success in the physical sciences is not only from the formulas and equations. It's as much or even more from imagining thing that don't exist. A few examples are imagining electrons as tiny beads, imagining lines of force, imagining a single voltage or current source and a single resistance in an electric circuit. I think the same is true in the religions. The gods and creators and avatars are not just useless baggage, they are an essential and indispensable part of what makes it possible for them to do what they do. The Dharma, and the laws of the Torah, Bible and Qur'an were not made, and could not have been made, *only* by experience over ages, by concern for family, society and nation. A part of how they were made was by imaging things that don't exist or that we have no way of knowing if they exist or not, just like in the physical sciences. I'm thinking that maybe you know that.By experience over ages, by concern for family, society and nation. That is how the laws of Torah, Bible and Qur'an also were made. Do you think that before the time of Moses societies did not have any laws?
".. the modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely mythical while also holding that "a Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in the southern Transjordan" in the mid-to-late thirteenth century BCE, .."
Moses - Wikipedia
Well, "The Indus Valley Civilisation was a Bronze Age civilisation in the northwestern regions of South Asia, lasting from 3300 BCE to 1300 BCE, and in its mature form from 2600 BCE to 1900 BCE." - Indus Valley Civilisation - Wikipedia
Do you think that Indus Valley civilization did not have any laws? There were societies much older to Indus valley. Think about the people of Gobekli Tepe (The settlement was inhabited from around 9500 BCE to at least 8000 BCE during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic - Göbekli Tepe - Wikipedia). Moses that way, is very recent.
The Abarahamic laws are the codification of the laws by particular societies in their time. Believing that a God dictated them is falsehood. The Hindu advantage is that it is possible to change them to suit the times.
Well, people believe in various things. Not all are true.I understand all that, but alongside of that I think that in Hinduism the gods and the avatars, and some concept of ultimate reality play a role in that. Even if you don't believe in any of that, I think that you're well versed in the terminology, and that's what I was asking you about. If you don't tell me, I'll have to go and read about it in Wikipedia.
You aren't volunteering to be my expert in Hinduism?
Just wait till I return after having my lunch. That will be about 30 minutes. I wrote a reply but exceeded the time limit of 20 minutes for editing. The forum did not allow me to post it.
Perhaps not to you ...
In Hinduism, people believe in Four types of beliefs about 'ultimate reality... and some concept of ultimate reality play a role in that. Even if you don't believe in any of that,..
Thank you. You have made me very happy.
What do you mean by that .. that multiple people 'update' it constantly?
Yeah, people themselves change the rules with passage of time, update it. Society at one time did not accept inter-caste marriages, now it is not rare. Polygamy is not prohibited in Hinduism, but government (i.e., majority opinion) outlawed it. Since ages, but change is a part of it.