God's Personality

1) God is depicted in the Bible as one who communicates. That, in itself implies some sort of consciousness, or analogy of consciousness (or something of which our own consciousness is a feeble analogy).

2) God is depicted in the Bible as someone who carries out actions, deliberately (beginning with the act of Creation).That, in itself, implies some sort of will, or analogy of will (or something of which our own will is a feeble analogy).

That is the basis on which people say that the Biblical God has "personality". Completely impersonal and unconscious things do not communicate with others, and do not carry out acts of conscious will. Therefore the Biblical God cannot be unconscious and impersonal.

God loves us so much he wiped out the human race a few times, told the Jews to commit genocide several times, killed and tortured millions, but in the end he ultimately sacrificed himself to himself as a loophole for people to get on his good side. Yep, what a personality!

were the god of 6 trillion living things and we kill and replenish every day like supposedly god does. Its a similar concept.

I've said this before and I think the "God" of the bible is everything and anything people want him to be.

People make certain claims about their god but it seems they are making it all up as they go. Susie's god does not allow her to wear pants or dance and makes her keep her hair long. Joe's god tells him it's perfectly fine to have a wife and several mistresses.
They build their god up to be what they want him to be, just like children create a super hero. No one really knows anything about the personality of their god, otherwise there wouldn't be so many religions or branches of Christianity.

First let me say that I'm not trying to convert you, but rather I'm just commenting on your post.

Originally posted by typwar
Firstly I would like to point out I am not religious and am only posting this out of anger towards some of the acts of people I have seen lately.

I've got to ask, if you're mad at certain people then why not lash out at them? Why must you make the target of your anger the Lord? Believing on the Lord does NOT make people good. I wish it did, but it doesn't. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. If people wrong you, then blame them, not the Lord.

Originally posted by typwar
People have said to me things such as "God loves us all, we all have personal loving relationships with God" and "We are all that God created, God loves us so much that we are his only creation". Where do they get this information?

There are many passages in the Bible that profess God's love for all people, such as John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Originally posted by typwar
To me, this is a prime example of the selfishness of Christianity that I have grown to hate.

Your hate is misplaced, it is people who are selfish, not Christianity. People have done many wicked things while claiming they were done in Christ's name, it's happened a lot in the past and it still happens today. Christ Himself addressed these hypocrites in many passages, here's one: "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Originally posted by lostinspace
The question remains as to what brought the original consciousness into being?

Infinity is a difficult concept for us to wrap our heads around. We simply cannot accept the concept of an infinite being with our limited minds. But that doesn't mean it's not possible. God said "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." Note that He doesn't say that He was the beginning and He will be the end. He says that He IS the beginning and He IS the end. Why didn't He use past/ future tenses here? Because He exists outside of time. He is infinite. When Moses asked for God's name he replied "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you." How is it possible that an entity can have an infinite existence? All I can say is that explanation is above my pay grade

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by finalword
He's clearly fairly passive, libertarian and a hands off type of god. You never see the guy.

you can see him anytime you open your eyes my friend...

In every flower or rock, in every person or animal...

You just have to look

absolutely agree with you, to me everything on this planet and in the sky is evidence of his existance and i guess one day i had an epiphany, or maybe it just happened gradually, but the big guy just made his presense felt to meand has been standing next to me ever since, (cant get him to do the washing up though). People, dont let christianity spoil God for you, because you only have to look at 2000 years of Christian religion to see where the devil hangs out.

Originally posted by typwar
Firstly I would like to point out I am not religious and am only posting this out of anger towards some of the acts of people I have seen lately.

Now, on to the point. I seem to be noticing that people who believe in Christianity feel that their almighty God who is perfect and has no flaws whatsoever seems to have a personality. Here is my problem with this: An omnipotent entity who is supposedly perfect wouldn't have a personality as we do. People have said to me things such as "God loves us all, we all have personal loving relationships with God" and "We are all that God created, God loves us so much that we are his only creation". Where do they get this information? I don't recall the Bible saying exactly what God thinks, or saying that God forgives this but not that, and God allows death penalty, or God is against the building of a mosque, or that we are God's only creation and that God made the universe just for us.

To me, this is a prime example of the selfishness of Christianity that I have grown to hate.

edit on 31-3-2011 by typwar because: (no reason given)

First lets define;

Personality
# The totality of qualities and traits, as of character or behavior, that are peculiar to a specific person.
www.answers.com...

So by definition even though a supernatural being God does have a personality.

God does love all of his creation, yet he does not accept or behavior that is evil, bad, wrong what ever he does not like. Such as hate, envy, strife, murder, adultery, lust, defile.............................................

God's attributes are Love, longsuffering, patience, charity, hope................. God is good and our devises that we create are bad. God did not create bad the Devil and Man has devised the things against God that are sin.

A person can be a Christian all their life and be a unrepentant sinner the last week of their life and end up in hell.
A person can be a un-godly sinner all their life and with a truly repentant heart can end up in heaven.

God will forgive all sin there is only one he does not forgive blaspheme of the holy spirit.

As for Mosque building if you are referring to the God of the Holy Bible then yes he is against building a mosque as they are not worshiping the God whose name is Jesus as Lord and Savior. They are against him.

It may be hard to believe but we are his only creation that has free will and the universe is ours to view, it is his handy work.

reply to post by typwar


I really dont see how this is a conspiracy, maybe theology, but certainly not conspiracy. But any way, does it really matter? Here is your answer.
Christians basically perceive God in two ways, That of being an equal, and that of being an extra. However, both are wrong.Christians sometime are confused as to what exactly God is. God doesn't love because he is love.

1 John 4:8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

1 John 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

least those who forget. God is an action. God is a verb.- The truth to God Theo-

If you read God's Law in the books of Moses, from end to end, you might begin to discern the outlines of the Mind of God - what He loves, what He detests. Being the Designer and Creator, the love and hate are tied up in how His creation is following His design and plan.

Further, He tells us that His thoughts are not our thoughts, nor His ways our ways. You could apply the same analogy to your dog or cat. You don't expect a dog to do Calculus do you? Or a cat to not claw up the furniture??

Personality - yes! God is foursquare, a staight shooter, He sees all, knows all.

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote:

["you can see him anytime you open your eyes my friend...

In every flower or rock, in every person or animal...

You just have to look "]

As you and I already somewhere else is engaged in an extensive excahnge on that, I would just like to remind you, that that I am questioning about this 'seeing' of yours. Btw, how do you know it's a 'him', not a 'her' or an 'it' or a 'something' or just the 'nameless' (though the last would be beyond any scriptual affiliation).

As Nobama implied, people 'see' many different things.

Quote from your answer to Nobama: ["Even those that study the bible day in and day out still do not understand, there in lies the problem. Understand the mind of christ, and you can understand the mind of God."]

You have regressed the sitaution from 'answer'-level to 'method'-level. The same arguments for and against hold in both positions.

Quote from the same post: ["Love God, and love your neighbour as you love yourself.]

The same christian 'golden rule' which is saturated with implied conditional premises?

Quote: ["perhaps one day you will see..."]

And perhaps one day you will unsee.

PS Not stalking you, but you are a worthy sparring-partner.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by typwar

 

So are you implying it's okay for us to believe God is powerful enough to create us, the world and the universe out of nothing but isn't powerful enough to get a message to us or to reveal Himself to us?

edit on 1-4-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

The argument doesn't really connect to itself.

While it can be POSTULATED without any conclusive argument one way or another, that a creation took place, this does definitely not justify any claims of knowledge of the details and even less of any communication going on.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
1) God is depicted in the Bible as one who communicates. That, in itself implies some sort of consciousness, or analogy of consciousness (or something of which our own consciousness is a feeble analogy).

2) God is depicted in the Bible as someone who carries out actions, deliberately (beginning with the act of Creation).That, in itself, implies some sort of will, or analogy of will (or something of which our own will is a feeble analogy).

That is the basis on which people say that the Biblical God has "personality". Completely impersonal and unconscious things do not communicate with others, and do not carry out acts of conscious will. Therefore the Biblical God cannot be unconscious and impersonal.

Couldn't be said more clearly.

Something obviously being 'dualistic' can't be non-dualistic.

There are further implications from this. Is an endlessly regressed 'first cause' still dual, i.e. having 'intent'. Or isn't it just wiser for the time being to accept, that human abstractions and conceptualizings on the this are so insufficient, that any fixed positions on it will be just babbling.

reply to post by SavedOne


You wrote:

["All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."]

As I'm part of 'all', you speak on my behalf also. Sorry, I'm not a member of your club, don't accept its premises and in any case I can't remember giving you or anybody else the right to categorize me in any way through a use of invented doctrines.

Quote: ["There are many passages in the Bible that profess God's love for all people, such as John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."]

And there are many places saying something different. So the situation is ripe for another cherry-picking contest, where interpretation-methodology recently has become the inter-christian dispute of the day. For non-believers its just plain nonsense considered from practically all perspectives.

Quote: ["Christ Himself addressed these hypocrites in many passages, here's one: "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.""]

Nonetheless OT and its atrocities is an un-avoidable part of the christianities, no matter how much its toned down or 'explained' as being 'symbolically' atrocious.

Quote: [" Infinity is a difficult concept for us to wrap our heads around."]

So better not include it in any arguments leaning on the 'majical' potential of an alleged 'god'.

Quote: ["But that doesn't mean it's not possible."]

Neither is the flying spaghetti monster "not possible". Get a grip on the semantic trickery, non-believers don't swallow it.

For the rest of your post, it's circle-argumentation. Because it's in the bible, it MUST be true. Logic can be a terrible thing, hitting both ways, especially if it's hijacked and twisted.

PS I'm also not trying to convert YOU.

reply to post by ACTS 2:38


You wrote:

["God does love all of his creation, yet he does not accept or behavior that is evil, bad, wrong what ever he does not like. Such as hate, envy, strife, murder, adultery, lust, defile............................................."]

Ofcourse measuring from the premises baked into the system, where SOME murdering, strife, adultery etc is OK, because it's divinely santioned.

Quote: [" God's attributes are Love, longsuffering, patience, charity, hope................. God is good and our devises that we create are bad"]

Correct, if you accept circle-defintions. I don't.

Quote: ["God did not create bad the Devil and Man has devised the things against God that are sin."]
This pre-arranged and circle-argumented cutting the situation down to 'what suits my argument best' options, are unfortunately completely wrong, as the flying spaghetti monster created BOTH Jahveh AND the devil. Any blame must be directed at the spaghetti monster. I can 'prove' this (for a starter: It's written. In the sentence just before. Written is written. I have other 'proofs' also if wished for).

Quote: ["As for Mosque building if you are referring to the God of the Holy Bible then yes he is against building a mosque as they are not worshiping the God whose name is Jesus as Lord and Savior. They are against him."]

Yes, we all know, that the christianities (or at least some of them) are far superior to any competitors, and they hope for an exclusive monopoly of having the only 'truth' on the market. It's what makes extremist christianity so attractive.

Quote: ["It may be hard to believe but we are his only creation that has free will and the universe is ours to view, it is his handy work."]

If you try hard enough, it's possible to BELIEVE practically anything.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by Akragon

 

You wrote:

["you can see him anytime you open your eyes my friend...

In every flower or rock, in every person or animal...

You just have to look "]

As you and I already somewhere else is engaged in an extensive excahnge on that, I would just like to remind you, that that I am questioning about this 'seeing' of yours. Btw, how do you know it's a 'him', not a 'her' or an 'it' or a 'something' or just the 'nameless' (though the last would be beyond any scriptual affiliation).

As Nobama implied, people 'see' many different things.

Quote from your answer to Nobama: ["Even those that study the bible day in and day out still do not understand, there in lies the problem. Understand the mind of christ, and you can understand the mind of God."]

You have regressed the sitaution from 'answer'-level to 'method'-level. The same arguments for and against hold in both positions.

Quote from the same post: ["Love God, and love your neighbour as you love yourself.]

The same christian 'golden rule' which is saturated with implied conditional premises?

Quote: ["perhaps one day you will see..."]

And perhaps one day you will unsee.

PS Not stalking you, but you are a worthy sparring-partner.

Hahaha, no worries my friend... sometimes it takes me a while to get back to people because im continuously looking for people who are talking to me... i skip over other comments directed towards others a lot. I just found this one LOL...

As you and I already somewhere else is engaged in an extensive excahnge on that, I would just like to remind you, that that I am questioning about this 'seeing' of yours. Btw, how do you know it's a 'him', not a 'her' or an 'it' or a 'something' or just the 'nameless' (though the last would be beyond any scriptual affiliation).

I don't really see God as having a gender, i've questioned others on this as well. I mearly use "him" because its what i've always used to refer to God... i don't know why... i could say her... *shrug* either way it doesn't matter the fact is when i say "him" im refering to God...

As Nobama implied, people 'see' many different things.

Quote from your answer to Nobama: ["Even those that study the bible day in and day out still do not understand, there in lies the problem. Understand the mind of christ, and you can understand the mind of God."]

You have regressed the sitaution from 'answer'-level to 'method'-level. The same arguments for and against hold in both positions.

yes, i use whatever method i can so people understand what im saying... im not trying to confuse people with words im only trying to get my reply on the table so as people can answer me in whatever way the need to. When i was talking to him the "understanding" part that people don't get is what you and i have been talking about on the other thread....Love.

What im "seeing" that everyone doesn't again lies in the understanding of what God is...

Quote from the same post: ["Love God, and love your neighbour as you love yourself.]

The same christian 'golden rule' which is saturated with implied conditional premises?

Quote: ["perhaps one day you will see..."]

And perhaps one day you will unsee.

As i've told you before my friend i am not christian....i have no labels ...i am me, i am who i am...

I pray that i will never "unsee" if that is even a word But i must say to do such a thing would be to deny what i know... i don't do backwards progression

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote:

["I pray that i will never "unsee" if that is even a word"......]

As bible-thumpers go (and in your case even only doing it in 20% of your posts as stated elsewhere), you're quite a decent and interesting version. You are amongst my favourites in that category, and if it wasn't so much fun to communicate with you, I'd never oppose you to the extent I do now. But you know that already, this is just for the public.

Quote continued: [".......But i must say to do such a thing would be to deny what i know... i don't do backwards progression"]

Well, as they (you know, the anonymous 'they') say: You live and learn. Wasn't that your own initial suggestion on this line to the person you hoped would 'see'? So just switch 'unseeing' to even MORE 'seeing' than you already have and you may progress towards truth via zen-buddhism (as I already have offered you the option of on the deep-loding thread). I'm a quite good non-guru.

Zen-buddhists in general reject the idea of any primal cause with specific characteristics, such as a 'personality'.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by Akragon

 

You wrote:

["I pray that i will never "unsee" if that is even a word"......]

As bible-thumpers go (and in your case even only doing it in 20% of your posts as stated elsewhere), you're quite a decent and interesting version. You are amongst my favourites in that category, and if it wasn't so much fun to communicate with you, I'd never oppose you to the extent I do now. But you know that already, this is just for the public.

Quote continued: [".......But i must say to do such a thing would be to deny what i know... i don't do backwards progression"]

Well, as they (you know, the anonymous 'they') say: You live and learn. Wasn't that your own initial suggestion on this line to the person you hoped would 'see'? So just switch 'unseeing' to even MORE 'seeing' than you already have and you may progress towards truth via zen-buddhism (as I already have offered you the option of on the deep-loding thread). I'm a quite good non-guru.

Zen-buddhists in general reject the idea of any primal cause with specific characteristics, such as a 'personality'.

haha, im no bible thumper my friend im beyond that... it is only a book, i mearly use it for religious discussion.

and if it wasn't so much fun to communicate with you, I'd never oppose you to the extent I do now. But you know that already, this is just for the public.

you feel free my friend, im not your opposition... you're also one of my favorite people to chat with...

I do so enjoy intelligent discussion, its hard to find these days

Well, as they (you know, the anonymous 'they') say: You live and learn. Wasn't that your own initial suggestion on this line to the person you hoped would 'see'? So just switch 'unseeing' to even MORE 'seeing' than you already have and you may progress towards truth via zen-buddhism (as I already have offered you the option of on the deep-loding thread). I'm a quite good non-guru.

Yes live and learn of course... but how can i show myself something i already see... What im talking about is there in front of you and me and everyone...but they don't see it, yet i do...

Again this comes down to understanding...

reply to post by Akragon

I pray that i will never "unsee" if that is even a word But i must say to do such a thing would be to deny what i know... i don't do backwards progression

There are some who consider that acknowledging one knows nothing is the beginning of wisdom.

Perhaps it is the clinging to our small slice of reality which restricts the potential to perceive all-that-is.

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by Akragon

 

I pray that i will never "unsee" if that is even a word But i must say to do such a thing would be to deny what i know... i don't do backwards progression

There are some who consider that acknowledging one knows nothing is the beginning of wisdom.

Perhaps it is the clinging to our small slice of reality which restricts the potential to perceive all-that-is.

Hey didn't i say that to you in a different thread?

hmm, maybe it was someone else...

Regardless that is very true... but i can't deny what i know...

reply to post by Akragon


You wrote to bogomil:

you feel free my friend, im not your opposition... you're also one of my favorite people to chat with...

I am starting to wish I was on the opposite fence to bogomil because I know I would enjoy a good sparring with him, but alas, his views are too closely aligned to my own, and where they digress, he is rather more accommodating than usual.

There does seem to be a scarcity of healthy and meaty debates of late in these philosophy forums. Well, maybe it is just a cycle, and we'll be faced with more debates than we can handle in the near future.

As to God's personality, I tend to think that the qualities a believer assigns to God is often a reflection of the highest personal ideals of the believer. The believer projects their loftiest values onto God, and then proceeds to worship God. It is an interesting relationship.