I posted this topic here as relions beleive they know the answer


This is a conundrum/paradox and enigma I have battled with for many years.

Is the entity we refer to as “God” a Supreme Being separate from the rest of existence? In other words is “God” a product of the eternal Energies that pervaded Existence some how evolving out of this primordial maelstrom of raging energy/

Is “God” just a Supreme Being sitting in glory on a Christian throne that is able to manipulate the universe and all existence to his will?

Is “God” a non –energetic something called Spirit which existed before what we call the universe came into being,

If “God” is truly separate from matter and energy and just used it like we use bricks and motor to build our homes, did he do the same by using his spirit (whatever that is) and formed the universe with these components at hand.

Or does “God” equate to Existence. In other words the whole of Existence is “God” and sentient.

The question begs if “God” is not energy and matter where did it come from.

Regardless of any answer we give the question of infinite regression will always rear its head.

I say that given I exist, Existence is just something in an ever changing moment. No beginning, no end beyond human comprehension

Regards

Alan

Alan,

Hello. Thank you for your replies on my previous posts.

I would like to share with you and the others some personal views I have on God.

First of all, I do not see God as a Supreme Being. If he thought of himself as Supreme, I think he would be arrogant.

I believe God is the most evolved soul existing in the entire universe. I think he masters PUL, knowledge and feeling, beyond our wildest imagination.

I believe he is made basically out of the same energy as we are, but, if we could know ourselves as well as we should and be 100% alined with our natural way of Being, and keep this state stable, I think we'ld be a lot closer to God.

I think God is the Soul that has found the best way to be and that he is still learning with us, through us, to be even better at what he is. I believe he does not need to incarnate in a (earth)life or get involved in somebody else's life to experience and learn.

I believe God has found a way so that he does not need the duality of earth-life system to be more loving, to give more PUL.

I think we have everything to learn from him, but I think we should realize that there is a fundamental difference between: knowing through knowledge and wisdom AND knowing through experience of self.

God could certainly give us all knowledge, if we chose to, BUT to understand that knowledge, we still need to experience "these feelings" ourselves. I believe that this is the entire goal of the earth-life system.

Through experience, we learn what works on this planet (which is qualified as good) and what does not work (which is qualified as evil). Through experience, we learn to be more loving or how to avoid to be less loving.

I believe God thought of this system, and from these thoughts life evolved to what we now know as earth-life. Then we selected a life we were curious to experience.

This is only my personal opinion, of course.

I hope it helps you, somehow.

Much love,

Sonia

My dear Alan, I believe that God is the One/Place in which each of us puts our fears to rest. There is no Other.

Sometimes, for me, the simplest things are the most difficult to understand. As a human being, we want this or that. Once we have this or that, we imagine that we want 1/2 dozen of this, or maybe a dozen more of that.

If we stay in the center there is no need for anything at all. God simply Is, as we Are.

As you say: "I say that given I exist, Existence is just something in an ever changing moment. No beginning, no end beyond human comprehension"

love, blink

Alan:

I agree with a lot of what Sonia wrote. Here's a few of my own words.

Existence started out with one being, call this being God if you like.  This being was made up of a mixture of awareness, the ability to learn and think, and the energy with which it creates. Eventually--which probably didn't take a long time because this being was infinite in nature and time didn't exist--this being figured out how to use its energy to create many other beings. Since nothing but this being existed, it used its own being to create everything including all of us. Therefore, we are all extensions of this one being.

Eventually we find our way back to God and bring our lessons and uniqueness with us. God never considers us to be seperate from him. Just different parts of himself playing various roles. Yet he respects the independence each of us have, because each of us experiences the consequences of our choices.  At a basic level we are never seperate from God and each other.

[Alan:] Is the entity we refer to as “God” a Supreme Being separate from the rest of existence? In other words is “God” a product of the eternal Energies that pervaded Existence some how evolving out of this primordial maelstrom of raging energy/
_______________________________________________________
Strictly speaking, God does not "exist."  The biblical God is not one being (a Supreme Being) among countless other beings; rather, God is the ground of all being and "Yahweh" means "the One who causes to be."    In this sense, God is the only meaningful answer to the question, "Why is there something rather than nothing all all?"

[Alan:] Is “God” just a Supreme Being sitting in glory on a Christian throne that is able to manipulate the universe and all existence to his will?
_________________________________________________________
This question overlooks the biblical teaching that we must think of God poetically.  Taken literally, divine throne imagery contradicts the standard biblical teaching that God is omnipresent, and hence, cannot be localized on a throne.  For example, the prophet Isaiah has a vision of God sitting on a throne (6:1-6), and yet, the Bible repeatedly warns us that no one has really ever seen God.  This contradiction vanishes once the symbolic nature of Isaiah's vision is recognized.  Simlarly, visions of angels are at times equated with visions of God.  But again, the angel is merely being treated as God's representative who conveys God's presence and message.    

[Alan:] If “God” is truly separate from matter and energy and just used it like we use bricks and mortar to build our homes, did he do the same by using his spirit (whatever that is) and formed the universe with these components at hand?  Or does “God” equate to Existence? In other words the whole of Existence is “God” and sentient.
__________________________________________

Now you are inviting a critique of the flawed standard New Age perspective that God is "All That Is."  At one level, this perspective is meaningless.  That is, if God is the Source is everything, then by definition everything is in a sense a part of God.  At a deeper level, the New Age view is false because it overlooks the possibility that an omnipotent God can create sentient beings and universes that can in important ways operate independently of God's micro-management. The realm of "Not God" designates all manifestations of chaos, randomness, and free will that God does not control.  To some extent, we are all "victims of time and chance (Ecclesiastes 9:11)" because God does not control all the natural forces of chaos.  Because God does not control these systems, He is the ground of their being, but not their being itself!  An omnipotent God can create "Not God!"

This metaphysical outlook fits neatly with the view that God is also love.  But love is by nature relational and thus love is meaningless unless the object of love has a different identity from that of the lover. Robots are incapable of true love.  The biblical God is in process and broadens His horizons through that process.  Free manifestations of independent creativity and love are the very heart of the meaning of existence.

Don

Hello again Don,
one little critic, you said:
"At a deeper level, the New Age view is false because it overlooks the possibility that an omnipotent God can create sentient beings and universes that can in important ways operate independently of God's micro-management."
This would only be so when there already had been a sort of independent matter which had not been created by God. If God had created really everything, than there simply would be no source of independence left. The thought that there is a creator who can create something, and then let it run on it's own is taken from our daily life, where nothing we create is entirely created by us. If it would (time, space, every particle and what not all), it wouldn't be independent of us as the creator; in fact, it seems as if in this case, creator and creation would be unseparable.

Spooky

Spooky,

My disagreement with you is based on 5 axionatic principles:

(1) Free will implies an ability to choose contrary to one's inclinations. Otherwise, choices are either random or coerced, but not free.

(2) Free will implies an ability to choose contrary to the will of a God of love, that is, to make unloving or even hateful choices.  Otherwise, our loving service is not self-caused and therefore lacks moral value.  
Free will is a necessary condition for a universe with moral value.

(3) You are assuming that matter and energy are entirely governed by laws of which God is aware and which God controls.  You overlook the possibility that an omnipotent God can inject an element of randomness or chaos into the action of particles and energy.  If so, then God by definition does not micro-manage them.  But, you protest, God transcends time and would foreknow the result of each random or chaotic interaction that is not governed by any laws.  This quibble overlooks the distinction between divine foreknowledge and predestination.  To foreknew is not to control.

(4) What it all boils down to is this.  There is no self-contradiction in the claim that an omnipotent God can create physical systems and minds that create outcomes that God foresees but does not control.  If I can make moral choices that are not predetermined by some X factor in my brain or mind, then by definition, there is dualism and God is not me, even though God is the ground of my being.  If God's foreknowlege always allows Him to detect some X factor in my mind that makes my choices predictable, then by definition that X factor deprives me of free will.  

(5) If God has not predistined choice X, then X is not made by God and God is not All That Is.  If God foreknows that I will choose X, and prevents me from making this choice, then God has deprived me of my free will.      

Don

Berserk2 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 9:24pm:

Spooky, My disagreement with you is based on 4 axionatic principles: (1) Free will implies an ability to choose contrary to one's inclinations. Otherwise, choices are either random or coerced, but not free. (2) Free will implies an ability to choose contrary to the will of a God of love, that is, to make unloving or even hateful choices.  Otherwise, our loving service is not self-caused and therefore lacks moral value.   Free will is a necessary condition for a universe with moral value. (3) You are assuming that matter and energy are entirely governed by laws of which God is aware and which God controls.  You overlook the possibility that an omnipotent God can inject an element of randomness or chaos into the action of particles and energy.  If so, then God by definition does not micro-manage them.  But, you protest, God transcends time and would foreknow the result of each random or chaotic interaction that is not governed by any laws.  This quibble overlooks the distinction between divine foreknowledge and predestination.  To foreknew is not to control. (4) What it all boils down to is this.  There is no self-contradiction in the claim that an omnipotent God can create physical systems and minds that create outcomes that God foresees but does not control.  If I can make moral choices that are not predetermined by some X factor in my brain or mind, then by definition, there is dualism and God is not me, even though God is the ground of my being.  If God's foreknowlege always allows Him to detect some X factor in my mind that makes my choices predictable, then by definition that X factor deprives me of free will.   (5) If God has not predistined choice X, then X is not made by God and God is not All That Is.  If God foreknows that I will choose X, and prevents me from making this choice, then God has deprived me of my free will.       Don

A BIG WELCOME BACK DON!!....ULTRA!!!...To the rescue..PLEASE!!!Harv.

I see Don. The axioms you shared may be axiomatic when you assume a free will as you do, but when you don't do it this way, it aren't axioms anymore.

We've had that discussion already in the thread

Who Are We- Brain or Spirit?
http://afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?num=1189351469/0

along with my recent remarks my point of view is clear I think. I'm the opinion the understanding of what God is is unnecessarily complicated by the assumptions you're making.

What I really like is, that God is not a being among other beings, but the ground of all being. I can agree with that.

Spooky

Alan McDougall wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 6:08am:

The question begs if “God” is not energy and matter where did it come from.

Hey Alan,
My own interpretation is to view "God" as basically a co-ordinating principle, or energy if you like.

The way I'd describe it would be to point at all the trillions of people and various other life forms that exist, but to then say that I tend to view "God," as an entity which is able to take all of those disparate perspectives and opinions into account, and still formulate a consistent plan of action for attaining the wellbeing of all of them, relative to their specific context.

Putting it more simply, an analogy which people here might be able to visualise more easily would be the Borg Queen, from some of the later depictions of Star Trek.  The Queen was someone who took in all of the individual thoughts of the beings within the Borg Collective, and was still able to create a single, coherent plan from them on a course of action for the Collective to take, in terms of its' survival.

That's also where the definition of the dark and light duality comes in, in the sense that people complying with the above are said to be working with the light, and those trying to do the opposite, with the darkness.  Then however you also find out that both of those halves ultimately serve the whole.

I make no claim about whether the above is accurate in any objective sense, either.  It's basically an interpretation which I've found relevant as one individual.

The evidence seems to point to a scenario where what we refer to as "God" has the ability to give itself an entirely different appearance or cognitive interpretation for each individual, and yet maintain a consistent existence within, and over and above, all of them.  

Hence, your own answer to this question will be different from mine almost by definition, because of God's ability to manifest to us in a manner which is specific to our own situation and background.

I had a God thread going a month or two ago.  Further questions come up when you use the "ground of all being," idea (which I like as well).

The first obvious issue is if God is more like a principle or foundation of love and energy, where does the personal communication come from, and where do we fit in areas such as worship of God and the covenant between God and man found in the old and new testament?  Some on this site (OOBE dude comes to mind) have said that there is no need to worship God, for we are all God, and a unity, so it is beside the point.

For those who choose to worship God, or who speak of their own personal relationship with God, the idea that God is the foundation of our being, without being a superconsciousness that is loving and intelligent, doesn't sit well.  

I believe the answer lies in the middle.  For me, God is the foundation of both life and love.  Hence, all actions that move toward life and love come from him eventhough we may think we are initiating the actions by ourselves.  Is that something to be worshipped?  For me, absolutely.  Perhaps as something I'm a part of, and not as an other.  Don says that the duality is necessary to really express love - it implies an object of love; a lover and a lovee so to speak.  I'm not sure.  Sometimes love is a feeling or state of consciousness, without the duality...

Matthew

You are God, I am God, Everything and nothing is God.  

I have found this website and it's forums quite interesting myself.
Link: http://www.maya12-21-2012.com/spirituality.html#The_Results_of_Vibration

Maybe it will for others too.

I think, if we worry that much about God, it is somehow because we wonder if God can help us at all improving our faith.

Do you think God can help us, in a way that we can see?

Sonia

Hello people,

As you know I have been away due to eye ops, So I must consider all your posts carefully before responding intelligently.

What I read is that all of you have deep and profound ideas about  God  

I really like Sonia’s ideas I also don’t perceive god as a being something like a huge man. he is infinitely beyond that title for him

Briefly I perceive God as the eternal mind that is the cause of and that which sustains and drives all Existence,

He is the Ceaseless Creator of all things

Thank you all for your very intersting reponses which I will address one by one and return, hopefully with a good response to each

I did not intend to leave the thread hanging but my eyes would not permit me to repond until now (I know what poor Paul must have suffered, I think like me he had catarachs

Regards

Alan

Don, and others,

The forum program is playing up, not showing all posts

All of you have made very valid and interesting comments and maybe each of you might be correct. God after all is a God of a thousand billion facets, like a great beautiful eternal crystal diamond pervading infinite existence and reality unknown to us

Don
What you have posted is interesting but remains in the domain of speculation. You state Yahweh means (The one who causes to be)but the correct translation/interpretation from Hebrew into English is "Ever Existing one"

Don you know that saying Yahweh means that is simple wrong.

Now how can you state that he who exists forever does not exist? If he vanished so would all existence

Then you try to separate God from creation and the universe and at the same time hint that he is Omni All. A contradiction in terms.

The best English words that I have to describe God is the inexplicable, Sublime Great Inscrutable Ever Existing One .

That he might separate part of his being to create, the universe and humanity makes a lot of sense to me.

Thus we are all created out of God stuff,      

But we must know that a multidimensional Infinite mind is beyond the grasp of three dimensional mortal humanity, indeed inscrutable until he teaches us deeper realities, maybe in this life but definitely in the life to come

“When we see him then we will be like him” “The pure in heart shall see God”

So God can make himself observable to us and at the same time embrace all of creation indeed the whole of Existence

Regards

Alan

God is all there is. All of it, the coming and the going, the light and the dark, the physical and the metaphysical. All of it.

Thomas

Sonia dear,


Your post below and my reponse to it


Quote:

I would like to share with you and the others some personal views I have on God. First of all, I do not see God as a Supreme Being. If he thought of himself as Supreme, I think he would be arrogant. I believe God is the most evolved soul existing in the entire universe. I think he masters PUL, knowledge and feeling, beyond our wildest imagination. I believe he is made basically out of the same energy as we are, but, if we could know ourselves as well as we should and be 100% alined with our natural way of Being, and keep this state stable, I think we'ld be a lot closer to God. I think God is the Soul that has found the best way to be and that he is still learning with us, through us, to be even better at what he is. I believe he does not need to incarnate in a (earth)life or get involved in somebody else's life to experience and learn. I believe God has found a way so that he does not need the duality of earth-life system to be more loving, to give more PUL. I think we have everything to learn from him, but I think we should realize that there is a fundamental difference between: knowing through knowledge and wisdom AND knowing through experience of self. God could certainly give us all knowledge, if we chose to, BUT to understand that knowledge, we still need to experience "these feelings" ourselves. I believe that this is the entire goal of the earth-life system. Through experience, we learn what works on this planet (which is qualified as good) and what does not work (which is qualified as evil). Through experience, we learn to be more loving or how to avoid to be less loving. I believe God thought of this system, and from these thoughts life evolved to what we now know as earth-life. Then we selected a life we were curious to experience. This is only my personal opinion, of course. I hope it helps you, somehow. Much love

,



Sonia dear

I also can’t see God as some arrogant Supreme Sovereign being needing us to praise and sing to him day and night. Why must we constantly assure God that he is the greatest thing ever, He does not need his ego stroked and he simple knows he is what he is without pride coming into the equation

I really like your post and take about what God is to you. I often say ones God is the God of their understanding and your belief about him/her is beautiful indeed

God could give us all knowledge just as you stated but he will not do so until he is sure we can handle it correctly, don’t you agree?

And you make a very valid point about God evolving. As the creator he must be evolving with his creation

Like I stated in my reply to Don , we are made from "GODSTUFF" but separated as sentient beings who love and adore him as mother and father of everything

God to me is the primordial mind, the Fist Thinker he that perceives and creates

Much love

Thank you for a nice well thought out  response

Love

Alan

Dear Blink

Thank you for your comments I agree and can not add to your wisdom

Love

Alan

Recoverer


Quote:

Existence started out with one being, call this being God if you like.  This being was made up of a mixture of awareness, the ability to learn and think, and the energy with which it creates. Eventually--which probably didn't take a long time because this being was infinite in nature and time didn't exist--this being figured out how to use its energy to create many other beings. Since nothing but this being existed, it used its own being to create everything including all of us. Therefore, we are all extensions of this one being.

(Alan)  Yes I agree again as I said to Sonia God is the Primordial Mind or awareness and the First Thought . We have just different wording

Spooky

Quote:

This would only be so when there already had been a sort of independent matter which had not been created by God. If God had created really everything, than there simply would be no source of independence left

(Alan)   Then Spooky if you are correct were did matter and energy come from. How were the fundamental constants formulated and by whom.

If you are correct and maybe indeed you are we are stuck with infinite regression with matter energy and God . Maybe then given infinite eternity God evolved out of this primordial matter energy something like the evolution of life on earth

Don.,

(Alan)  I concur with your second post directed at Spooky, "very thought provoking"

Petrus

(Alan)   While God is energy and the source of energy like you stated, he is an intelligent energy unlike the energy common to the universe. This eternal non –created energy is what we call spirit "GOD IS A SPIRIT"

I will respond to the other posts in due course

Regards

Alan

Alan wrote:

Quote:

Spooky Quote: This would only be so when there already had been a sort of independent matter which had not been created by God. If God had created really everything, than there simply would be no source of independence left (Alan)   Then Spooky if you are correct were did matter and energy come from. How were the fundamental constants formulated and by whom.

This is not my opinion. It was a "If this, then that" relation. Indeed, when something can't arise from nothing, there must have been something before, and this is iterated ad infinitum. I don't expect the old riddle of "Was there a beginning?" will be solved here in the physical. At least not in language based thinking.

Spooky

Spooky,

Your post

Quote:

This is not my opinion. It was a "If this, then that" relation. Indeed, when something can't arise from nothing, there must have been something before, and this is iterated ad infinitum. I don't expect the old riddle of "Was there a beginning?" will be solved here in the physical. At least not in language based thinking.

(Alan)  If there were no beginning the arrow of time would be pushed back into infinite eternity and we could never have arrived at the present moment in our universe.

Something like an athletic race with the start line backed into infinity, they then could never make any progress to anywhere or anywhen could they?.

To me this indicates that the universe is not static but finite, with a beginning and an end in the unimaginably distant future.

So the big bang theory of creation remains as good a one any to me and this theory needs a creator. There was something before it , however, Existence which I equate to God. There is no such state as nothingness.

When Stephen Hawking postulated that the universe might be eternal with no beginning his first wife an ardent Christian became very annoyed with him and it is believed this lead to their divorce. He has altered course since then and has suggested that the big bang is correct with a few minor suggestion or differences to the theory

His now well known words "when we formulate the Theory Of Everything, then indeed we will now the mind of GOD"

T.O.E

Regards

Alan

Now to finite little me for an infinite being like God to torment my by burning me in molten sulfur day and night forever and ever is a little harsh don’t you think?

I am only able to commit a puny finite sin against this huge colossal infinite being and due to this finite sin, I read in the Bible and her from fundamentalist  that I will be given an infinite punishment in Hell.

Of course if I change my evil ways and conform then I will go to heaven, even though I remain guilty of my transgression

I wonder it even the worst psychopath would do that to me. So I allow myself to question the logic of the Bible.

If the writer of the Book of Revelation was examined by a psychiatrist today, sprouting, locust with fiery stings in they tails, horses racing across sting people but not allowing them to die, the world bringing doom, angels pouring out veils of blood, great beasts and dragons killing and eating people.

Heck!! heck!! people he would be put on antipsychotic medicine, given shock treatment, confined for life to a mental faculty and that would be the last of him

But no people dig, search, interpret and try to understand the science fiction like visions of fantasy in the Book of Revelations written 2000 years ago by a possibly very sick first century man living alone in a cave.

Why God does not speak and convey exactly in human terms what he means, but supposedly hiding it in poetry language and unconceivable incomprehensible visions, continues to perplex and it just makes no sense to me.


But I acknowledge I could be wrong so I pray to god if there is a god to save my soul if I have a soul

Just kidding guys a little deep sarcasm by a person who has been around the block a few too times.

My problem is the Bible and how the Bible was written and by whom. And the countless different interpretation, over a hundred different translation in the English language alone.

But God as I perceive him is warm, loving, kind and forgiving but we must have deep respect for him because like. I previously stated he/she is not some weak grey haired granny or grandpa

God is light in which there is no darkness whatsoever. So existence is divided into light and dark realms and we are free to choose to which we would like to inhabit when we die

"My problem is with the Bible not Almighty God"

Regards,

Alan

Hi Alan,

A few months ago I came across a T.O.E. that seemed similar to a thread Dave started a while back where the two of you were discussing primordial consciousness containing entropy and also what you seem to be saying here.

In a nutshell, primordial consciousness or God as we call it is not infinite, but only seems to tiny, little us that it is infinite. This system of consciousness we call God could even be a part of a much larger system that we couldn’t possibly imagine. Anyway this God Consciousness contains entropy and through evolution it decreases entropy although increasing entropy is entirely possible therefore free will evolved. Time/vibration also evolved out of this consciousness as well as us, values, etc., which continues to evolve as we make progress in becoming more loving and thereby reducing not only our own entropy, but also that of the whole.

Here’s a link if you’re interested. http://www.my-big-toe.com

Kathy

Light of light,

Your quote


Quote:

In a nutshell, primordial consciousness or God as we call it is not infinite, but only seems to tiny, little us that it is infinite. This system of consciousness we call God could even be a part of a much larger system that we couldn’t possibly imagine. Anyway this God Consciousness contains entropy and through evolution it decreases entropy although increasing entropy is entirely possible therefore free will evolved. Time/vibration also evolved out of this consciousness as well as us, values, etc., which continues to evolve as we make progress in becoming more loving and thereby reducing not only our own entropy, but also that of the whole.

I can see by your post that you are informed in the arena of physics and science.

It is true that if God is made out of the same energy that drives and sustains the universe then he just like all energy and matter is subject to the relentless flow of entropy. If this is true then he is not infinite and must be dissipating his life energy into some huge heat sink. Maybe that is why the Bible stated that God in light and in him is no darkness what so ever

You possibly read my take about God not being constructed out of the same energy of the universe but some non-energetic pure light . that strange thing referred to as SPIRIT

Of course just like you stated, from my present very finite vantage point I cannot know the truth about what is now simply beyond human comprehension.

"You know physicist hate the concept of infinity" It is an misnomer a paradox inside an enigma an oxymorom. Something that must be but at the same time simply cant be. An impossible possibilty if you get my drift

Love

Alan

[Alan:] "The correct translation..from Hebrew into English is "Ever existing One."  Don, you know that saying Yahweh meas that is simply wrong."

Amusing presumption, given that I know Hebrew and you do not.  
I will merely quote one of the standard texts in the field: Dr. Bernhard Anderson, "Understanding the Old Testament," 4th edition, p. 62.
"The divine name Yahweh was based on the causative form of the verb "to be," namely, `He causes to be...'  This interpretation involves no change in the Hebrew consonants of the verbs in Exodus 3:14:"

"God said to Moses: `I am who I am [or better: "I will be what I will be"].  This is what you are to say to the Israelites: `I Am' has sent me to you."

[Alan:] "I can't see God as some arrogant Supreme Sovereign being needing us to praise and sing to him day and night...He does not need his ego stroked."
_______________

Alan, again you impose YOUR crude caricature of God on the Bible.  The Bible never claims that God has any needs or an ego.  On the contrary, the Bible repeatedly warns against he danger of anthropomorphizing God: e. g.

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are my ways your ways, declares the Lord.  As the heavens are above the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9)."

"Worship" is just another term for "love." If God is love and love is relational, then surely we need to worship [love] God.  The need is ours, not God's.  Some people think a mystical relationship with God is one of life's most important goals.  

You need to learn your linguistic limitations.  In another thread, your lack of knowledge of Hebrew also induces you to misread Judges 1:19:
"Yahweh was with Judah; and [Your error occurs in this gap.] drove out the inhabitants of the hill country; but he could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had chariots of iron."

To this Alan objects: "So Almighty God was defeated by a tribe because they had chariots of iron?" No, Alan, you omit the pronoun subject of the verb "drove out" and overlook the fact that in Hebrew "he" [Judah, not God] is the subject of "drove out."  Judah wins and loses a battle.  God is with Judah, but doesn't fight their battles for them here.  On this point check any number of modern translations: e. g. the New Internatinal Version:

"The Lord was with the men of Judah.  They took possession of the hilll country, but they wre unable to drive the people out from the hill country, because they had iron chariots (Judges 1:19)."  

Hawkeye and Thomas [tgecks]: Offering no justification, you both merely pontificate the standard New Age view of God that I refute in replies 4 and 6!  How do you imagine that your posts are helpful to anyone?  Can you say, "New Age Fundamentalist?"  I'll retract that inference only if you reply point by point to my refutations.

Don

Don:

If as you seem to be suggesting, everything that exists didn't come from God's own being, where did it come from? Did God look to a source other than his own being when he looked for the consciousness and energy to create other beings?  Just because Souls get confused for a while as they figure things out, this doesn't mean that they aren't inately divine.

Albert,

Those who insist that God is All That Is need to make this claim meaningful by explaining how a dualistic universe might differ from this view in a concrete way.  As the Ground of all Being rather than a particular being, God is still the source or creator.  The view that God is All That Is remains true unless the universe or free sentient beings can function independently of God's micro-management.  If there is neither free will nor any action of the universe that God's laws do not completely control, then the claim that something is Not God seems to be trivially semantic.  But then love and character have no moral value and there is no right and wrong in any meaningful sense.  We are nothing but robots exercising God's will.  

Don

Don

[quot
Code:

e]Amusing presumption, given that I know Hebrew and you do not.   I will merely quote one of the standard texts in the field: Dr. Bernhard Anderson, "Understanding the Old Testament," 4th edition, p. 62. "The divine name Yahweh was based on the causative form of the verb "to be," namely, `He causes to be...'  This interpretation involves no change in the Hebrew consonants of the verbs in Exodus 3:14

[/quote]


Your arrogant patronization of me and others are not well received and your blatant assumption that I do not know Hebrew like you do borders on the offensive, especially from a "so called man of god'

Gods "I AM" statement to Moses at the burring bush equated to “one who exists”. "But in your first post on this thread you said “he does not exist" Now that is amusing really amusing unlike my statement, ask the forum if Ever Existing One does not equate to "I am".  

Remember the famous statement of Descartes, “I think therefore "I AM”. This was to prove to himself using logic that “INDEED HE EXISTED”

Now all this singing and praising of god with loud voices and instruments in church. Is it really really accompanied with a deep felt love for God respect and commitment for his awesome Divinity? No most of them are just taking pride in how beautiful they sing, it is all about competition. Like Bruce Moen, I have searched for God and meaning in many Christian denominations at one stage became a rapid fundamentalist condemning the rest of humanity to hell, with some glee I might add.

But that is a long long time ago and thank God with these grey hairs of wisdom I now know God loves all of humanity, not just a select few. Indeed I have reached the position of despising exclusivity in all its bizarre forms

I am futhure along the path of life than you,  possible more educated in many fields outside your particular specialty and have been around the block many many times,

I have stood in many churched, some full of love and warmth, others just loud noise and madness. The TV evangelist shouting at the world frequently stealing money from the innocent makes my stomach turn.

You just like the rest of us you know almost absolutely nothing about this Infinite Entity we gave the title God. To assume you do is to fall into the trap of being puffed up with knowledge and making unpleasant hurtful comments to those like me , who you wrongly assume know less than you.

Alan

Here is an non-religious essay I wrote some time ago, trying put myself into the mind of God way back before existence as we know it.

This is how I peceive God

Thought and awareness came in the darkest place I was alone lonely beyond comprehension. Then before the first moment had happened I searched for words and found them. I said I must create existence beyond myself and make living companions


Aware of infinite potential in vast unploughed fields of dark nothing, I strode with great beams of cosmic light toward the infinite horizon of eternity, sowing seeds of existence before the timeless moment of creation. I am the boundless Mind, Original Self-Awareness the cause of everything, relative to nothing I am This.

On the panorama of bleak blackness, I rode on the back of the Absolute, sowing universal energy. Reality was my aim and the beauty of my achievement. Illuminating the darkness with beams of dazzling radiant glory was the first event of reason. I formulated in my mind the first number and called it “One”, I am the ocean into which all things return

With the now realities of the fundamentals of’ “one, and ‘zero”, I made everything. I am the Prime Mover and there was no proponent to my First Cause. I am the Immovable Rock and the Alpha point. I took these first numbers and weaved them into the fabric of the reality, creating all the limitless universes on the infinite timeless foam of nothing, which now makes all up existence. Indeed, I am the Almighty One. If you are, wise. “Do one thing,repect me for "I AM God"

I am the painter and the painting, singer and the song, the dance and the dancer, the stage and the actors, the writer of the script of existence. I am all these things who am I? I am Ultimate-All the Absolute Totally of all existence, yes, I am This, and do you exist? Then why cant to I exist?

The imprudent ask where you are, the wind blows on your cheek and you ask ‘where are you? The oceans roar and you ask,’ ‘where are you? The stars glow and you say mysterious one, ‘if you would only show yourself, blood flows in your vessels and you say ‘what are you? Indeed, I am the First Cause and the Immovable Rock.

I am the encompasser and enfold all things within the substance of my being. Resonating with profound unfathomable vibrations, creation trembles at the passing of my presence.

I am the stalker of the soul, the defeater of death. I am supreme and take the abstract, and convert it into concrete matter.

I dwell in composite bright light, which is the breath of my life. I now look with delight upon the beauty of the garden of my creation, sparkling out of the darkness of infinite universes. In eternal joy, I survey my prime creation and called it life.

I am well pleased with my endeavors and set the clock of time to run for eternity.

I am the winder of the watch of creation. ‘I Am He,
“I AM GOD”

Composed By Alan McDougall (27/6/2007)




 

Don,

1Coriinthians 28, And when all things are subdued to him, Then will the Son also be subject to him so that God will be "ALL IN ALL".

Therefore, dear Don, even the New Testament tells us that God is" ALL IN ALL"

Alan

Surprise Don.

No one really knows the EXACT Hebrew meaning, except you of course

Here are just a few takes on that enigmatic name lost deep in the mysteries of the ancient tribe of Hebrews

From Wikk
Basically, when God says, "I am that I am," he is giving the translation of what the word "Yahweh" means. In other words, he is saying "My name is the fact that I exist." Etymologically, the word "Yahweh" is related to words that mean "to be" or "to create."

The meaning of the name YHWH is not very clear, and therefor subject to much debate. The key scene in this respect seems to be Ex 3:13-15, where God names Himself first:  (I Am Who I Am), then  (I Am), and finally  (YHWH) and states that this is his name forever and a memorial name to all generations.

It has been long supposed that YHWH is derived from the verb that is used to make I Am, namely  (haya 491) to be, to become, to happen, or rather from an older form and rare synonym of haya, namely  , hawa, hence y-hawa or yahweh, the proper imperfect of the verb, thus rendering the name either Being or He Is. (But note that the Hebrew language is far more dynamic than our modern languages. The verb to be indicates an action that intimately reveals the nature of the one who is doing the acting.)

On the other hand, perhaps the name YHWH means Tom, Dick or Harry in a language that has slipped out of the collective human consciousness and we are left with the echo's of a revelation that was as sincere and confidential as the word abba: daddy.

The divine name YHWH pronounced "Yahweh" means: "I FOREVER WAS, I FOREVER WILL BE", as He continued to reply to Moses/Moshe's question within Ex 3:15 / Shem 3:15 by also saying "this is My Name Forever" = "I Will Be Forever". Another correct translation of His name is: "I always was, I always will be", or " I Was and I Will Be Forever". (They all have the same meanings)

Oh Don, How I have missed your opinions. The fact that you dismiss what you call "new age view of God" truly shows how closed minded your religious beliefs must be. Or am I just reading you all wrong? Is what you are trying to say is that your beliefs are closer to the truth than mine? You belief in God stronger? Your choices better? Well then you should have your own church so that you have the opportunity to gather as many sheep as you can to follow you to your heaven. Perhaps I will see you there when I pass through F25. Oh yes, you do have the church of Don don't you? Perhaps Don, we are both right. Perhaps I am a reflection of God. No less, no more. Perhaps God is an just as you place him/her, above all others and everything. Perhaps, just perhaps, there is your God and there is also my God. By the way can you say "Christian fundamentalist"?

I love that we have the freedom to share our opinions here. How fortunate we are to have this freedom of religious beliefs. In the long run, we will most likely be correct in all of our opinions.
Joe

[color=#000000]Hawkeye

From your post

Quote:

[color=#0000ff]You belief in God stronger? Your choices better? Well then you should have your own church so that you have the opportunity to gather as many sheep as you can to follow you to your heaven. Perhaps I will see you there when I pass through F25. Oh yes, you do have the church of Don don't you? Perhaps Don

I really think, however, no one can claim knowledge about the Infinite like he does. "Your idea is just as valid as any person and God is the God of your understanding"

What really angers me if with I hear puffed up so call experts pontificating that God, will god will do this if you did that, god is this god is that, this pleases god that does not, give to god and he will reward you a hundred fold

God is who he is and he IS  and will act and react exactly as he/she wants to, without asking our permission. He is the boss and the buck of accountability stops with him

We are finite beings (at present) and God is infinite, so, therefore we must be much closer to a cockroach than to God the Infinite.

So I dismiss anyone telling me like Don does that God is thus. He is beyond human comprehension and we can only comprehend what he allows us to comprehend.

I see all human ideas about God and exactly who is really is as just subjective speculation.. Of course we all have a grasp of minor truths about existence and how it came to be.

I understand that given that Don is a minister of the church he feels compelled to preach to the forum and I like this, without debate and dialogue the forum would die

Alan

Alan,

Exodus 3:14 provides an analogy for the God name "Yahweh" insofar as this name derives from the Hebrew verb "to be."  But "Yahweh" is not borrowed from Exodus 3:14 and is not an equivalent of "I AM."  In Hebrew grammar, it is the hiphil (causative) for of the verb "to be:" i. e. "He causes to be" or "creates."  

The Bible often speaks as if God "exists."  But to prevent Moses from identifying God with a particular being with an identifiable fixed essence, God evades the request for a name and instead offers the phrase "I am who I am" or, better, "I will be whoever I will be."  As the ground of all being, God reserves the right to manifest in countless ways to people of other faiths and cultures.  (Amos 9:7).  Because God is the ground of our being, "in God we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28)."

Your allusion to "all in all" in ! Corinthians 15:29 betrays a lack of knowledge of Greek idioms.  The Greek phrase in question (panta en pasin) is an idiom which is rightly translated by the New Living Translation: "...so that God will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere (1 Corinthians 15:29)."  

As for your insinuations that the biblical God is worshiped because of a preceived ego problem involving God's needs "needs:"  Human hands can't serve God's needs; for He has no needs (Acts 17:25)."

Alan: "I am further along the path of life than you."  OK!
Alan: "No, most of them [church people] are just taking pride in how beautiful they sing."
__________________________________________________________

You are merely projecting your own cynical bias on to people you don't know.  I hate to break this to you, Alan, but most parishioners are self-conscious about how inadequately they sing.   That is why it is so hard to recruit new members for a small choir.  Aware of theirlimitations, they humbly sing in rapt adoration to offer themselves up in gratitude to the God who loves them just the way they are and is a living helpful force in their lives.  Non-Christian newcomers are converted because they sense the sweetness of God's Spirit in the warmth, the singing, and the prayer support of the services.  

Let me give you just one of many examples.  Jon was a well-educated gay, Jewish agnostic jazz band leader addicted to cocaine.  He needed a few extra bucks and so he volunteered to be our organist/ pianist for a little while in one of my prior churches after our organist died.   He was so blown away by the sense of love he felt during the worship,
by the sense of God's presence, and by the miracles experienced by his gay friends there that he joined the church and recently invited me back for his baptism.  Jon was motivated to clean up his cocaine addiction on his own and remains a loyal member of that chruch 13 years later.

I take it that you accept what I said about Judges 1:19.

Don

Hello Alan,

I am happy that we can share opinions here.


Alan McDougall wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2008 at 7:46pm:

I also can’t see God as some arrogant Supreme Sovereign being needing us to praise and sing to him day and night. Why must we constantly assure God that he is the greatest thing ever, He does not need his ego stroked and he simple knows he is what he is without pride coming into the equation I really like your post and take about what God is to you. I often say ones God is the God of their understanding and your belief about him/her is beautiful indeed God could give us all knowledge just as you stated but he will not do so until he is sure we can handle it correctly, don’t you agree? And you make a very valid point about God evolving. As the creator he must be evolving with his creation Like I stated in my reply to Don , we are made from "GODSTUFF" but separated as sentient beings who love and adore him as mother and father of everything God to me is the primordial mind, the Fist Thinker he that perceives and creates Much love Thank you for a nice well thought out  response Love Alan

QUOTING ALAN:
God could give us all knowledge just as you stated but he will not do so until he is sure we can handle it correctly, don’t you agree?

Yes, I agree that I believe God could give us all knowledge, BUT I don't think he checks whether we can handle it correctly. I think he would prefer that we would handle it correctly, unfortunately, the choice is not upto him. If he could always be sure that we could handle everything, I think there would be no murder, no suicide, no theft,... to summarize there wouldn't be no crime, nor hurt.

If supposedly, we are parts of God that don't know themselves, we suffer the consequences of our ignorance in our actions. Ignorance leads to mistakes. Human mistakes, by definition, are contrario to the nature of the soul, which is to be loving and bring happiness and good. The contrary of love, good and happiness, etc. IS hatred, war, evil and suffering, etc.

Quoting myself:
If supposedly, we are parts of God that don't know themselves, we suffer the consequences of our ignorance in our actions.

If we are probes of curiosity, there must be something to be curious about. Curiosity is a result of lack of knowledge about a certain matter. Lack of knowledge = ignorance.

QUOTING ALAN:
And you make a very valid point about God evolving. As the creator he must be evolving with his creation

Actually, I am not as sure about that as I seem to be. How do you define evolution. Evolution means change. Suppose you would master PUL at the highest level (like God for example). You can only learn to master it even better by watching others make mistakes, but in fact in essence you already ARE PUL. Evolving and learning to practice a craft better you already know is a different thing to me.

QUOTING ALAN:
Like I stated in my reply to Don , we are made from "GODSTUFF" but separated as sentient beings who love and adore him as mother and father of everything

I believe we adore him, because he IS what we want and need AND because we lack it here.

I believe that God is asked a lot (In prayers, we ask him to get this, to get that, etc.), but how many of us wonder if God feels loved, if he feels happy. How many of us, give him something spiritually by free will, other than what he learns from us by hearing our thoughts (since he must be a gifted psychic, I believe) and through compassion for our state.

If we really adored him the way we should, we would all create a world in accordance to our real nature: which is our will to be happy, good and loving.

Instead, society just most often reaches for the first thing listed: happiness for itself, not looking at the damage it makes, creating that happiness. You start to be good, when you start to act lovingly, on the whole line. This means, when you start to create happiness for EVERYBODY and not just an small elite. Society, as a whole, has not learned that yet.

QUOTING ALAN:
God to me is the primordial mind, the Fist Thinker he that perceives and creates

I would like to nuance my point of view. I believe creation is a partnership:

God first thinks of a model (like Earth-Life System) to generate a certain type of experience. Then souls choose to enter that reality and modify it again, through there believes. We are as much responsible of our evolution as is God.

I think that, no matter how much suffering we create, one day we will we forced to get rid of wrong believe-patterns (and behaviors due to that). BUT for the moment, when society changes a pattern, it is mostly not out of LOVE, but out of necessity (to avoid a war, to get the economy better, to improve diplomacy, etc...) but too often not for the people.

The system gets more support than the people who are part of that system. The reason for that is, that the system is exploited by people who need that system, to match their believes (eg. a famous politician needs to keep his power, to gain more money and power. When he has power he feels safe and can give himself the illusion he is loved, because he feels needed. This means he will support this system, to create his happiness. Companies support him, because he will help them vote laws that will be good for their company. The chief of the company needs that to earn a lot of money to buy a yacht, a house, school for his daughter, to please his wife with diamonds. His wife needs diamonds to impress the jetset. Her daughter needs the jetset to become a famous actress. She wants to be adored for her talents as an actress, etc...and because she feels unloved because her father is constantly working and having dinner with famous politicians. Etc...)

The system is not God's will, but a combination of consequences of choices, which have consequences, etc....like a stone thrown in the water, you see the waves expand.

We might be expansions of God, until we've fulfilled our curiosity.


OTHER THINGS:
I think there are as many realms in God's world as their are beliefs and ways of being.

There are realms for people who do not believe in God, but does it proove God does not exist?

God does not dictate what to believe, he leaves it upto us to discover our nature through experience. God can be a place, a soul, etc.

The concept of God has become so high, we've lost touch with it. I think we shouldn't put that concept on some kind of pedestal, or believe 1 religion or belief knows the truth about it.

When you see somebody and you think you love that person: is it the truth OR a point of view OR both.

Why wouldn't God be like that, the point of view we want to be truth, because we need it.

The essence of God is maybe not his knowledge, the place he lives or the kind of soul/energy he is. The essence of God that matters to us, would rather be the STATE OF BEING he has achieved, and which we are seeking to KNOW.

Would one care about God, if one reached the final/ultimate state of happiness, bliss, knowing, loving, etc ? Would GOD still be the 1 thing we seek and worship and put on a pedestal ?

I think, God matters to us, because he is a symbol of what we try to achieve ourselves.

God symbolizes a quest of our own, and many --I believe -- seek to KNOW him, to improve their own path, but maybe nobody walks the same path in life and maybe HE is the one that already made his harsh trip to knowledge (What do we know, of what he went through?) and KNOWS that nobody can help you on that trip, just as nobody can be in YOUR position, or have YOUR feelings and thoughts.

That is what makes us unique, each one of us. That is what makes us alone, but also a defined part of a greater whole, that we named God.

Of course, that is all a belief/thought of mine, but I like to share it.

Sonia

Hi,

There are comprehensive replies that  must give proper thought to before replying,in full.

Don in your post your said

Th
Quote:

e Bible often speaks as if God "exists."  But to prevent Moses from identifying God with a particular being with an identifiable fixed essence, God evades the request for a name and instead offers the phrase "I am who I am" or, better, "I will be whoever I will be."  As the ground of all being, God reserves the right to manifest in countless ways to people of other faiths and cultures.  (Amos 9:7).  Because God is the ground of our being, "in God we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28)."

In response to the above statement, I agree completely. I do not see God as a being of some sort but he/she the Mind that pervades all existence or creation if you like.

This primordial Mind had to do something, it had to Think and to find words from which to begin creation. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the Word was GOD John verse 1 = Jesus the first Being "  indeed he is the Word of God" The second person of the triune God

Alan

Alan,

Yes, your last post is on the right track.  The strength of claiming that God is the ground of being rather than a particular being is this: it holds the key to the mind-numbing question, "Why is there something rather than nothing at all?"  The weakness of this claim is our inability to explain exactly what it means to say that the ground of all being is neither a particular being nor All That Is.  Perhaps the right question at this point is this: How can Divine Mind transcend time and space?  We can't imagine a particular being existing without imagining it as enduring.  If it endures, it must endure through time to some extent.  So if it is truly timeless, then it cannot "endure" at all and hence cannot even "exist" in any meaningful sense of that word.  It's as if Divine Mind has an infinite number of creative thoughts, each of which is timeless, has nor duration, and hence does not exist, but rather grounds all existence in the sense that divine thoughts can manifest as particular enduring realities!  But now I'm talking way over my head! :-?  

Don

Don in your post you said

Perhaps the right question at this point is this: How can Divine Mind transcend time and space?  We can't imagine a particular being existing without imagining it as enduring.  If it endures, it must endure through time to some extent.  So if it is truly timeless, then it cannot "endure" at all and hence cannot even "exist" in any meaningful sense of that word.  It's as if Divine Mind has an infinite number of creative thoughts, each of which is timeless, has nor duration, and hence does not exist, but rather grounds all existence in the sense that divine thoughts can manifest as particular enduring realities!  But now I'm talking way over my head
]

Quote:

Don in your post you said Perhaps the right question at this point is this: How can Divine Mind transcend time and space?  We can't imagine a particular being existing without imagining it as enduring.  If it endures, it must endure through time to some extent.  So if it is truly timeless, then it cannot "endure" at all and hence cannot even "exist" in any meaningful sense of that word.  It's as if Divine Mind has an infinite number of creative thoughts, each of which is timeless, has nor duration, and hence does not exist, but rather grounds all existence in the sense that divine thoughts can manifest as particular enduring realities!  But now I'm talking way over my head

Now instead of parting at a crossroad of dispute we have found a place of convergence that will possibly allow us to dialogue meaningfully without putting one another down


Endure forever, infinite, eternal are concepts that make no sense when they are linked to linear time we inhabit as three dimensional mortal beings. I perceive God as that which exists in a place that Jesus said was heaven “Our Father who is in heaven”  God is also unlike us in that he inhabits infinite dimensions.

Thus heaven is somewhere else, not the universe. God must endure as you said from a platform of what I call the every changing NOW.

He must observe everything that has happened, that is happening will happen in the future. I am the Alpha the Omega, the First and the Last, He that was and is and is to come. This gives credence to my suggestion that God endures as the One who IS IS.

Using an analogy of a disturbance in a village involving the actions of running rampant around in the streets doing something.

A helicopter flies over the village and the observers in it can see the whole event in one time frame, from that observer platform.

The Bible says the Eye of God roams the earth seeking out what people are doing. God exist in what I call the Great Observer platform, observing all creations as one ever changing event.

The Observer Platform is Gods Holy Spirit, is it not he that now persuades man that he is in need of redemption. I know this is a very technical view but it is the best I can do as a Mechanical Engineer who has some understanding of Biblical truths

Another possibility is God observes everything like an unraveled movie reel frame by frame. Is this is true then he could see the whole picture of his creation, indeed from Alpha until the end of time Omega. This might sound a little silly, but after all creation is Gods movie is it not. The error with this idea is that it does not really allow for free will. The Calvinist will like this idea I think.

Of course using this analogy God could cut, edit and splice this huge creation movie, so that it does not take away free will.

By the way Don, which English version do you use, there are so many each claiming correct translation or interpretation

Regards

Alan

Lets lighten up  little

"I think we should ask liitle children what is about God"

You don't have to worry about me. I always look both ways. - Dean

I think the stapler is one of your greatest inventions. - Ruth M.

I think about you sometimes even when I'm not praying. - Elliott

I bet it is very hard for you to love all of everybody in the whole world. There are only 4 people in our family and I can never do it. - Nan

Of all the people who work for you I like Peter and John the best. - Rob

My brother told me about being born but it doesn't sound right. - Marsha

If you watch in church on Sunday I will show you my new shoes. - Mickey D.

I would like to live 900 years like the guy in the Bible. - Love, Chris

We read Thomas Edison made light. But in Sunday school they said you did it. So I bet he stoled your idea. - Sincerely, Donna

I do not think anybody could be a better God. Well, I just want you to know but I am not just saying that because you are God. - Charles

I didn't think orange went with purple until I saw the sunset you made on Tuesday. That was cool. - Eugene

I don't ever feel alone since I found out about you. - Nora

In Sunday school they told us what you do. Who does it when you are on vacation? - Jane

I read the Bible. What does begat mean? Nobody will tell me. - Love, Alison

Are you really invisible or is that just a trick? - Lucy

Is it true my father won't get in Heaven if he uses his bowling words in the house? - Anita

Did you mean for the giraffe to look like that or was it an accident? - Norma

Instead of letting people die and having to make new ones, why don't you just keep the ones you got now? - Jane

Who draws the lines around the countries? - Nan

I went to this wedding and they kissed right in church. Is that okay? - Neil

What does it mean you are a jealous God? I thought you had everything. - Jane

Did you really mean do unto others as they do unto you, because if you did then I'm going to fix my brother. - Darla

Thank you for the baby brother, but what I prayed for was a puppy. - Joyce

It rained for our whole vacation and is my father mad! He said some things about you that people are not supposed to say, but I hope you will not hurt him anyway. - Your friend, but I am not going to tell you who I am

Why is Sunday school on Sunday? I thought it was supposed to be our day of rest. - Tom L.

Alan-- I remember a story that was told to me as a child. Some Saint??? who was a philosopher was walking along the ocean shore line asking the same question.  Who is God?  He became very perplexed.  He spotted a young child playing, scooping up waves and met up with him/her.  The child had a seashell and was running to the ocean, scooping up the water, running back to a hole and pouring the ocean water into the hole. He then repeated the action.  The "Saint" asked the child, "what are you doing?" The child responded --- I am going to scoop up all the water in the ocean and pour it into this hole.
The saint chuckled and said-- "My child, that's impossible".  The child looked up and said--- It's the same with your puzzle.
Then the child disappeared.

Identicat,

I really like this little sweet story and will keep it. "Unless you become as a little child you will not see the kingdom of heaven" (childlike not childish)

Love

Alan

Have a look at this thread of mine from 2006