What, who, or where is God not?

Inspired by @SalixIncendium's recent thread about God, I invite you all to share what God is not, to you.

Are there "God-free zones" in the universe?

If God is a person, what about other persons?

If God is One, what about the other numbers?

...?

 

Namaste

 

No.

Good question! Sorry, but I'd choose the philosopher's answer:
"An individual substance of a rational nature." (Boethius) So 'person' to me suggests not a particular individuality ...

All flow from the One ... it's an ordinal rather than a cardinal designation.

 

It is my understanding that since all that is, was created by God, there couldn't be anything that He is not. Now when it comes to things that aren't things, like terrible actions of humankind, even when I act completely against what I might consider to be God's will, He gave me the choice to do so and I wouldn't be without Him... in this sense, nothing exists that is not of God ---not to imply that when I choose to do terrible things, that's what my Creator wants... in a sense, all that is good comes from God and all that is bad comes from us... but he made us and gave us a choice, so in that sense yes even when we act against our spiritual compass, we are exercising the free will that we wouldn't have if He didn't give it to us.

He is All-Present, so that includes everywhere and much more that may not be a place.

He is not a person, but His will has been revealed through people time and time again throughout the ages.

He is One because by definition of His attributes (Most Powerful etc.) there can not be more than one.

This of course is only my personal understanding and as such well prone to errors and misunderstanding.

 

Then it would be better to speak about "The First", rather than "The One"? The imagery of the second, third etc flowing from the first suggests a temporal ordering, i.e. creation. Or is it the sense of "foremost", as reflected in such words a German "Fürst", Latin "princeps", English "prince", indicating timeless hierarchy?

In either case, what about the last and least? If God is there as well, in what way is it meaningful to talk about the difference between first and following? What's the difference, if God is the difference as well?

 

So this freedom of choice, that sounds a bit like an area from which God has receded to give you space to maneuver and "do bad"? It exists by the grace of God, as you mention, but is God there or not?

 

God is an illusion (maya).

Why did God give us this horrible choice?

 

I think in Greek Philosophy, it's traditionally been 'The One'?

in principio creavit Deus caelum et terram

The latter. The Septuagint opens "Εn ἀρχῇ", and the Vulgate "In principio", so both Grrek and Latin infer a principial rather than a temporal order.

I think the classical distinction is the One and the Many, ie. God and everything else. First and Last infers the classical alpha and omega, the original and the end of all things.

 

By my definition of G!d...

No, n/a, One=all encompassing

 

We were created this way, with free will and choice, intentionally. God doesn't really exist in a place or area (whether physically or conceptually) from which He could be receded.

You ask one person "where is God?" and they say they don't see anything but God in the world and in themselves... and you ask another person "where is God?" and they might say "nowhere that I can see or know of"... another might say "first tell me what God is..." yet all three live in the same world and are undergoing the human experience.

So my answer would be more like "where is there that God is not?" -- but if you were to respond "I don't see God anywhere" then I would just think that we have a conceptual difference and not a reality difference... that is, I don't believe I see any angels or miracles or anything of that sort that a person who says they are an atheist doesn't see. In fact I am convinced that I am living the same human experience as any other (regardless of what they call themselves) --- I really feel that those experiences that I might relate to my spirituality or belief in God (and might verbalize as such) are well present in every other human being's experience --- but that they might just not use the same concepts or words as me to describe them.

 

Coincidence, causation, correlation.

It ain't easy... especially when the Observer affects the outcome wanting their belief and per work in to be validated.

 

But then, Bahaollah had the vision of the 'Heavenly Maiden'? How can you, as a Bahai, say that angels do not exist? Was Bahaollah lying?

 

Choice comes with human consciousness? It is the other side of the coin. An animal does not have a conscience of right and wrong, good and evil. An animal does not have the consciousness that it will die someday; it is what makes us human, and is the root of human contemplative philosophy?

 

Well, in atheists' view, an apology for God

 

Do we know this?

 

Do fish and cattle contemplate the meaning of life and the universe, or venerate dead ancestors?

 

They don't, but how does that prove that the so-called entity for which no evidence has ever been observed (God) has given free will to humans and is interested in testing them for loyalty and morals? Chimps and apes have better intelligence than fish or cattle, humans have evolved further than that. It is only a matter of evolution.

 

These are tribal necessities? Nothing special unless extended beyond the tribe or group, especially to the poor and hopeless, etc?

Further in what sense? Was human 'higher' consciousness a goal of evolution? Is not human evolution parallel with chimpanzee evolution?

 

I was talking about myself. I don't speak as a Baha'i: just myself and my opinions.

 

Whether Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, Baha'u'llah, etc. spoke the truth or not is up to you to decide for yourself.

And if you say "it's all lies and falsehood" who am I to say you are wrong? How could I claim that my particular opinion and understanding is more correct over yours or anyone else's... I am a human being and all my understandings are prone to error... I could well be wrong in just about anything that I think I understand.