Whether God could create a God?
-
sounds like calculus.
it's all about limits
we go to the positive and negative infinityheaven or hell when this rides through.
when you do math are you "physical" on the paper?
what makes you uniquely you?
your intelligence (reference to a. i.) on that paper or just a few numbers your throwing out there into the equation?
numbers are infinite it's it's own world
your pencil "rules" that worldso why make a god who owns a god?
-
Hail,
God cannot create Himself but only beings in His image. A father causes creations (sons and daughters), not an identical version of himself and the creations have to grow themselves into what they wish to be based on the provisions from the father.
Paradoxically the two realms, the world (al-ardh) and the origin (al-asema) work the same but physically versus abstractly except the wise one has their foot in the other non-visible world which there are subtle metaphors of in this world.
You will not find God in the Flesh but only mislead yourself. One must look beyond this illusion, contradiction. God is God of the living not the dead. God is Father only of the Spirit and not the Body. The son of the flesh is not alive but dead while they may perceive it not. Your whole purpose is to come alive by cultivating your Spirit's growth. Your Spirit is to be in the same model as God, your Father, but then one cannot be distracted by the Body which was designed to mislead from the start and cloud the Spirit perception and prevent it from cultivating. This was your test. Your test is to manage to see through your deception and find a way out by not desiring to be the Body with all its deceptive impulses. This is Satan's (the Body's instinct) will.
God did not create your Body as a pleasure for you. This is a trap. It is actually just a primate your soul is bound to making it relatively advanced. Its weaknesses causes havoc, just observe the world for an example. The people who have succumbed utterly to the Body ruin the world. It is easier to find a needle in a haystack than to find the flame of their Spirit.
Your Body is not the real you but this is what you are made to believe. The one who finds themself will find the Father for the Father has been there all along yet you could not see it because you were so blind, blinded by your Body. This is because the Spirit's origin is the Father while the Body is of death/lifelessness. God designates dead as being people who simply follow the "automation", i.e the predictable behavior of the bodily species called Homo Sapiens. You can clearly be better than that by finding your true identity.
Rabb is the used word in Arabic and it means something like Developer. Some people have translated Rabbi as teacher, which is a kind of "developer", due to this linguistic phenomenon. Morphologically Rabb means more of "Foundation-Giver". Always hard to find a feasible translation into other languages.
Be safe
Amenuel -
if one see that as possible then yes and the results is still one God..
- = ?
It can be
+=
or
+= Impossible
Given to add any number / amount to a number we need to recognize the finite / border / limit of such number first before addition.
And we can't do that for an infinite number given we will count the amount of infinite number until infinity... (no end)..Note This kind of question exist due to the view of "human - like" God..
Salaam,
Not sure if you meant with "" Allah.
If so then the first "" is not equal to the second "" in your " + ="
The second is always a creation of the former, thus can never be Allah.With other words "Whether God could create a God?" is a flawed question.
There are more of these weird questions, like "Can Allah make a circle which is a square?".Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam,
Not sure if you meant with "" Allah.
If so then the first "" is not equal to the second "" in your " + ="
The second is always a creation of the former, thus can never be Allah.With other words "Whether God could create a God?" is a flawed question.
There are more of these weird questions, like "Can Allah make a circle which is a square?".Salaam,
BenderThat's why I gave 2 options... it depends on one perspective...
But in any case it will not resulted in 2 Gods...
Again this line of question exist due to the view of "human like" God, popular in the western world.
God who envied, God who has enemies, Gof who get angry / pissed off, God who fought a war / battle, God who wrote a book..The flaw is actually on the view of "human like" God itself..
-
I.e. the instinctive primate god with the ape's typical fallible traits. It is as primitive as its adherents.
That's why I gave 2 options... it depends on one perspective...
But in any case it will not resulted in 2 Gods...
Again this line of question exist due to the view of "human like" God, popular in the western world.
God who envied, God who has enemies, Gof who get angry / pissed off, God who fought a war / battle, God who wrote a book..The flaw is actually on the view of "human like" God itself..
-
This thread is full of pure conjecture about the nature of God. No person is able to conceptualise the nature of God. His nature is beyond our comprehension.
The Quran warns us not to spread speculation about Islam as though it is knowledge.
Incidentally, the question makes no sense. A god is not created, by definition, so you can not define any created thing as a god. It's not a theological question; it's a semantic one, and the answer is no.
-
Incidentally, the question makes no sense. A god is not created, by definition, so you can not define any created thing as a god. It's not a theological question; it's a semantic one, and the answer is no.
Right. It is very common that people, we, come up with quetions like those, like when we try to characterize God as good or bad according to our own demands on what goodness or badness we exect.
Good and bad are human concepts. We need those concepts for our own good. ?Does God need them? and least of all ?Is He subject to that?. No he created those concepts for us, that we know. Not for Him.
Salaam
-
Indeed.
The flaws are found in people's logic and perception, not in reality.
People would say "Can God create a stone so large he cannot lift it? In either case he's not omnipotent as either he cannot lift it, or he cannot creat it. Therefore God doesn't exist."
rotfl -
This thread is full of pure conjecture about the nature of God. No person is able to conceptualise the nature of God. His nature is beyond our comprehension.
Your statement itself contains a false conjecture...
Given nature itself is a creation..
Time and Space itself is a creation..The conception of "infinity", later to be symbolized in math with , started as a philosophical discussion in / around early Indus Aryan civilization.. when they're discussing the definition of "ultimate reality" which later they named as Brahman.
Something which has no beginning or end.. encompassing everything and beyond..Early Judaism also had similar view on YHVH..
"Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool. Where is the house you will build for me? Where will My resting place be? Has not My hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares YHVH
-- Isaiah 66 -
-
God's nature is esoteric but not impossible to know. God is an expanding consciousness with every "cultivated" soul being a significant share of it while the lifeless person is merely a drop in the ocean (metaphorically speaking). The stronger a soul the greater share of the Grand Consciousness and thus greater influence potential, e.g. the ability to prophesy events and one becomes a determiner rather than "fate-ling". The relationship God versus soul/person (nafs) is highly symbiotic based on above elaboration.
There are theorists who say we are God and that is basically true albeit there is a kind of Force (like in Star Wars) which is inherent in every matter and non-matter. We do not replace it (Rabb) but we can synchronize ourselves to "the full image of God" and each person is supposed to be a "Who Is" which is the English translation of the Semitic word Allah. God will "harvest" (release) souls which have attained the successful level of ascent towards absolution, much like is taught in Hinduism. Failures will return in the Flesh repeatedly with the Spirit level retained but with physical memory suppressed which can be brought forth through various measures (meditation, hypnosis etc). It is the Body that clouds one from perceiving they have existed as a soul for some time.
Be safe
Amenuel -
Jafar, that's another semantic argument. I used the phrase the nature of God to describe the qualities that God has. The meaning of the statement has nothing to do with Nature.
I'm not sure how the history of the concept of infinitely is relevant here.
The historical concept of infinity is relevant to show how and when human civilization recognized the "true God".
(And not human-like deity kind of God)
Infinity is the true answer on your question of "What's the Nature of God"..Time and space is merely a creation.
The nature is merely a creation.
Border and limit, of any dimension, is a well engineered design.
Our current "observable reality" is merely a perception.
Infinity is the absolute reality. -
Jafar - Infinity is a simple concept that has been around forever. There have always been ideas regarding things which have no beginning and no end. Allah is not infinity (glorified is He). Allah designs and creates things, but infinity does not. Allah is aware, while infinity is a concept we are aware of. Infinity is not aware of anything. We could make a long list of qualities that Allah has that the meaning of the word infinity does not include.
I think you're stretching the meaning of the word infinity way too far. Allah is not infinity, which is an abstract concept, not a concrete thing that exists.
-
Man of Faith - Your post is blasphemous. Allah is utterly independent of His creation. He has no need of the worlds. He does not depend on Creation. Allah existed absolutely before any of us existed at all. To suggest that we are somehow a part of God is utterly at odds with Islam.
You claim that 'stronger' souls are able to prophesy the future. That seems to be something you have originated without reference to the Quran.
You claim that we are reincarnated, and are aiming to be released from the cycle "much like is taught in Hinduism". Again, this is blatantly at odds with Quranic beliefs. We are not reincarnated at all.
I didn't realise you were promoting this kind of thing when we spoke the other day, else I would have mentioned it then. Respectfully, this is a forum for Quranists. It's pointless if anyone can post anything, even if it is totally at odds with Islam, just because the user believes in it and decides to call it Islam.
This isn't aimed at you personally. I have been trying to push back on a number of users lately, and am honestly just trying to find the best way to reform the forum so that visitors can read discussions of Quranism without frequent interruptions that are literally irrelevant. Otherwise, we will simply educate less people, and gain less knowledge ourselves. I left this forum a few years ago, because it was far too noisy. There are bound to be other people who also left for the same reasons.
Maybe I am wrong, and the community does not share my feelings or concerns, but I have had conversations in private that confirm that I am not alone at least.
Please understand this is not personal.
-
Peace csmith.
When you say,quote
I left this forum a few years ago, because it was far too noisy. There are bound to be other people who also left for the same reasons.What does this mean in regard to this forum?
Are some going to restrict views? Why call it a forum then?
I am asking ,respectfully, because I do not agree with the view that someone is going to put other boundaries besides the clear rules of the forum.
Those who want to leave can do so if they wish, those who want to join can do the same. This is a free choice open to all.
Are we( whoever the "we" are?) going to create new rules? What next?
The fair way is to let whoever was accepted as a member to give their view freely . After all ,they are accepted because they agree to the existing forum rules already. That should be enough.
Sorry about the off topic.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Hey Good Logic, salaam.
As I understand it, what I am asking for is required by the forum rules - Rule 2 to be specific
2] Please note that this forum is primarily dedicated to God and the study and understanding of His Scripture (The Quran). Thus, mocking/ridiculing/insulting God and/or the Quran, and/or not being able to back-up claims against the Quran with specifics may result in deletion of such posts and/or removal of topic and/or disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
I don't want action to be taken against anyone, but would like to see more discipline regarding the part of Rule 2 that says "or not being able to back-up claims against the Quran with specifics".
If the community want to have a forum where people are welcome to promote their religion, even if it is totally at odds with the religion Allah has set out in His Quran, that is their choice. I am not trying to change people's minds about anything. I just don't think that that is a good idea for the reasons I outlined in my last post.
I would like a forum dedicated to Quranism, while you expressed a preference for a forum that only requires people to respect one another, if I understood your points properly. That is way too open for me. Currently, every interesting post gets buried in pages of other posts that are not relevant to Quranism, and are often lengthy promotions of the author's personal, original religion. This means that most people will not read most of the best posts. It is too much work to find them, and the process is unintersting to people looking for information on Quranic beliefs.
The community really need to debate the finer points of the forum rules, so we all know where we stand.
-
Hey Good Logic, salaam.
As I understand it, what I am asking for is required by the forum rules - Rule 2 to be specific
2] Please note that this forum is primarily dedicated to God and the study and understanding of His Scripture (The Quran). Thus, mocking/ridiculing/insulting God and/or the Quran, and/or not being able to back-up claims against the Quran with specifics may result in deletion of such posts and/or removal of topic and/or disciplinary action being taken against the offending member.
I don't want action to be taken against anyone, but would like to see more discipline regarding the part of Rule 2 that says "or not being able to back-up claims against the Quran with specifics".
I agree this rule is overstepped often.
Currently, every interesting post gets buried in pages of other posts that are not relevant to Quranism, and are often lengthy promotions of the author's personal, original religion. This means that most people will not read most of the best posts. It is too much work to find them, and the process is unintersting to people looking for information on Quranic beliefs.
That is true enough.
Salaam
-
Peace csmith,huruf.
We have to leave that job to those assigned to do the moderating.
As for Qoran, it defends itself.
I do not see an issue. trolls/abusers..etc get found out .
People choose what to read regardless, some even ignore "good logic" and common sense in some threads.I have found that everything can be useful and serves as a lesson ,both the good and the bad.
A little bit of patience is sometimes required, after all the truth always stands out.
Sorry guys, I do not see a problem, but I understand your concerns.
GOD bless.
Peace -
Salaam,
I think the problem with defining blasphemy is that it's different for each person.
For some Jesus is God (and/or son of God) is blasphemy for others Jesus is not God (and/or son of God) is blasphemy.
God has hands is blasphemy (proof = quran), God has no hands is blasphemy(proof = quran).Salaam,
Bender -
Hello csmith,
What I wrote in the previous post may be blasphemous in the typical Islam sectarian doctrine, but everything is a matter of the perspective. I, and people who are aware of what I say, know Rabb is always greater than us and thus this "divine" relationship is not blasphemous depending on how you see it. Of course the Islam sect is fanatical about the non-association with God so hence you perceive this as blasphemous obviously. Jesus (Jesua) was responded to in the same way by the Pharisee clerics, who had a distaste for his utterances. His utterances were considered blasphemous.
What I argue is that we have a share in Rabb but we are not Rabb, i.e. we can never encompass what Rabb does, but we can have a greater consciousness due to Rabb. The whole point in our ascending to a greater consciousness is to "come alive" and get out of a type of blindness that surrounds us due to the affection of Satan (I interpret it as the instinct). To "be alive" is 'Allah', which in wider definition means 'Who Is'. Rabb on the other hand is always Rabb, it is a personal address for God.
To become alive is by separating your mind from the Body's influence with its instinct and that would develop the mind and thus the soul, the Spirit would grow, while on the other hand if you give in to the Flesh (the Body) then this is what you get, basically, the Body will have a dampening effect on your Spirit and you will grow to become the Beast you are within. The choice is rather simple; Spirit or Body, obviously the wise one aims to grow their superior Spirit and be wary against the temptations of Satan. Now the thing which you consider blasphemous is that this Spirit was made in the image of Rabb, yet Rabb always encompasses more than you do since it is the actual Grand Consciousness involving everything in existence, conscious or unconscious. Rabb appears to be treated in singular and thus Rabb is a direct personal address (the usage of "Ya Rabb" is another sign). The word Rabb does have more relationship with the root for Abbu (father) than you may be aware of. Rabb could be perceived as meaning "Developer" in English. Another hint is that in Jewish elder linguistics, "Rabbi" is seen as "teacher" and that comes from the meaning of "developer" that I just mentioned.
I.e Rabb means Creator in English or more specifically Developer, this you can verify using an ancient Arabic lexicon (also called Classical Arabic lexicon) where the definition "develop" is mentioned. An important thing is that a Rabb sustains a person in order that it develops, i.e. feeds whether physically or abstractly. This is also its quite close relationship to Abbu, except that Abbu means morphologically "cause to exist", basically (as it might be hard to translate) which is very close of developing something albeit Abbu is a simpler syllable meaning it only means "generate" while Rabb means "develop". An 'ibn' (traditionally son) thus means "a generation" or more morphologically exact "is generated integrity", so if you say Jesua ibn Miryem you say in English "Jesus (who) is generated integrity (of) Miryem". This very special way of writing a female's name for the child would only be used if the child has no physical father since according to Genesis "man and woman clings unto each other and becomes one Body" and it is customary that the male part has the "family name" (his name) towards the outside world, and this is the reason why you only find the male name's in Quran and never their wives, except for Miryem since she was unmarried. In some cases, when the man married the female, he betook a new name in order to reduce the sensation of sexism and unfairness. Usually this was not a problem for an understanding female.
You claim that 'stronger' souls are able to prophesy the future. That seems to be something you have originated without reference to the Quran.
There are hints of people able to foresee future events also in Quran and the sectarian interpretation of it. They do it in Rabb but nonetheless they are able to prophesy. Jesus healing of the sick and blind is a sort of prophesying and he does affect the future as when he commences healing the other person is in a different state. The usual interpretation of Quran is almost useless, but you can find traces of truth in it.
You claim that we are reincarnated, and are aiming to be released from the cycle "much like is taught in Hinduism". Again, this is blatantly at odds with Quranic beliefs. We are not reincarnated at all.
It is at odds with the sectarian understanding of things. The point is that these ignorant people had no clue of what Gehennom or Heaven (asema) is; you cannot really deny that you will be reincarnated (reborn/resurrected) in either Hell or Heaven. The question is though what the Hell is Hell? And what is Heaven, some hedonistic very primitive location where people are pleasing their lusts all day long? Or is Heaven a place where you are ethereal and thus without body and has become a powerful being with greater influence on things? If you look at things in different light, you are already in Hell, a certain "valley" of Gehennom and unless you change yourself you will surely remain there too. The traditional Hell is just a fabrication by incompetent interpreters who could not really read what they read, in elder scriptures Hell did not even exist.
I didn't realise you were promoting this kind of thing when we spoke the other day, else I would have mentioned it then. Respectfully, this is a forum for Quranists. It's pointless if anyone can post anything, even if it is totally at odds with Islam, just because the user believes in it and decides to call it Islam.
I am adhering to the book you call Quran. It is just that I read it differently from you, but I do my sincere analysis and study of it. Just because the burden of proof is on me it means I have to constantly defend myself and tactically improve my ways of explaining things. I consider that I have improved greatly over the months despite that it is a "mission impossible" (nothing is impossible and it is a reference to the motion picture with the same name where they actually accomplish "mission impossible). That is also a definition of faith. Like Darth Vader would have said "I find your lack of faith disturbing" (jokingly).
I have analyzed many words to pieces just due to the above reason that I have to really present things in a ridiculously high level of evidence and clarity, because misled poor people buy the deception of the clerics and scholars rather than truly investigate whether commonly used definitions are right at all to begin with.
I know many people loathe seeing me here but there are also people who actually appreciate it. Several of which are rather silent about it.
This isn't aimed at you personally. I have been trying to push back on a number of users lately, and am honestly just trying to find the best way to reform the forum so that visitors can read discussions of Quranism without frequent interruptions that are literally irrelevant. Otherwise, we will simply educate less people, and gain less knowledge ourselves. I left this forum a few years ago, because it was far too noisy. There are bound to be other people who also left for the same reasons.
You mean you propagate sectarianism and you wish to prevent opposing views in traditional sectarian manner?
You might miss that Quran is my mainframe and it is from that scripture I gain my inspiration. You might see what I say as disinformation and not knowledge but there are people who would say otherwise.
I yet try to stay clear from typical sectarian discussions about such as rituals to a great extent just for the reason I let people have their little religion for themselves. I have been involved in some so-called "salat" threads but that has been for educational and information purposes as some people might like to hear more than one school of thought. In most cases the hardcore Muslims are not receptive to what I say so I have learned to keep them short. They must themselves learn to develop slowly away from what they are doing. Obsession (particularly due to religious conviction) at the expense at flexibility, logic and reason is a very fallible trait of the human Body species called 'Homo Sapiens'.
Maybe I am wrong, and the community does not share my feelings or concerns, but I have had conversations in private that confirm that I am not alone at least.
Yes I know I have opponents around the forum.
Please understand this is not personal.
Well it is personally directed towards me. Your opinion. It is your right to voice it though. And I am not offended.
Be safe
Amenuel