God the unknowable

It is impossible for the human mind to comprehend what is commonly called God.
To have faith in something that you can in no way know, seems fruitless.

Must be the drugs.

Originally posted by merky

It is impossible for the human mind to comprehend what is commonly called God.
To have faith in something that you can in no way know, seems fruitless.

Must be the drugs.

The human mind accepts impossibilities and the comprehension of it, this is why there are no impossibilities or miss-comprehensions. When everything is known the faith is no longer required in it; having faith in something that is not currently known precisely fits the definition of faith. Now, why would faith Be fruitless if it is all ways only what it defines as faith? It is that faith that ultimately allows those who are faithfull to see this idea of God when it arrives in the consciousness.

As for the drugs comment, it was not needed, it was merely an attempt to mentally flatulate at the things that you are not understanding and accepting... that makes for a smelly departure.

Even for you to know that God is unkowable is to know God

[edit on 23-12-2006 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal

Originally posted by merky

It is impossible for the human mind to comprehend what is commonly called God.
To have faith in something that you can in no way know, seems fruitless.

Must be the drugs.

The human mind accepts impossibilities and the comprehension of it, this is why there are no impossibilities or miss-comprehensions. When everything is known the faith is no longer required in it; having faith in something that is not currently known precisely fits the definition of faith. Now, why would faith Be fruitless if it is all ways only what it defines as faith? It is that faith that ultimately allows those who are faithfull to see this idea of God when it arrives in the consciousness.

As for the drugs comment, it was not needed, it was merely an attempt to mentally flatulate at the things that you are not understanding and accepting... that makes for a smelly departure.

Even for you to know that God is unkowable is to know God

[edit on 23-12-2006 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Gee, Now turn those words around and get a whole different meaning.
The use the word god just adds to the confusion. Like this forum, the blind leading the blind.

You are your God.

What you choose to Be is what you become. Think about how strong and influential you are. You are Everything, Being

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
You are your God.

What you choose to Be is what you become. Think about how strong and influential you are. You are Everything, Being

I know, but I wish I could sleep. See the time? You also huh??? That's what happens when your on drugs for very bad Arithritis.

I see, "must Be the drugs" was referring to your arthritis? Apologies =) Sleep well, merky

You're right, we can never fully comprehend God. We are more pitiful than maggots in comparison...there is no comparison. But, we can still have a relationship with Him. I mean, you don't have to fully understand anything to have a relationship with it. We have faith in the others everyday and it is impossible to fully know anyone. I mean, it's impossible to even fully know ourselves.

Originally posted by NowAmFound
You're right, we can never fully comprehend God. We are more pitiful than maggots in comparison...there is no comparison. But, we can still have a relationship with Him. I mean, you don't have to fully understand anything to have a relationship with it. We have faith in the others everyday and it is impossible to fully know anyone. I mean, it's impossible to even fully know ourselves.

Right? What if We are left?

Why are maggots pitiful? Everything equally plays its roll in Existence.

Why is "God" a "Him"?

Correct, just the thought of something is a relationship with it.

It is impossible to fully know anything because We are all ways changing, We are not limited therefore We are never "full". If Our vessels were limited We would Be capable of Becoming full... yet it is possible to "fully" know Us in knowing that We can never Be fully known

[edit on 29-12-2006 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Correct, just the thought of something is a relationship with it.
=================================================
Shhhh, don't tell the wife. Perhaps you have seen that blonde down the street also...........................Whew, what a pair of [blank]...

LastOut:

I didn't mean to say that maggots are pitiful in themselves, just a comparison. But,although everything is valuable without comparisons, everything does not play an equal role in existence. You missed the point.

On thought being sufficient for relationship--in the most shallow sense. It takes alot more than thought to trascend into something meaningful. Most of us want the latter.

P.S. God does not have a sex. It is a convenience to refer to God as Him. It is also common because males are often seen as the more dominant of the sexes and most people feel that it is a sign of respect to address God with the dominant pronoun "Him."

Originally posted by merky

It is impossible for the human mind to comprehend what is commonly called God.

To a degree, this may be true. But, nothing is impossible, for that matter even nothing is not impossible. The human mind can be more than the human mind can be, if it were possible. But not if it is impossible.

Originally posted by NowAmFound

LastOut:

I didn't mean to say that maggots are pitiful in themselves, just a comparison. But,although everything is valuable without comparisons, everything does not play an equal role in existence. You missed the point.

But it was said, and the comparison is the admittance. Everything plays its role equally in Existence because Everything is Existence. No point was missed.

On thought being sufficient for relationship--in the most shallow sense. It takes alot more than thought to trascend into something meaningful. Most of us want the latter.

Thought is made of what it makes of itself. Thought is relationship. Shallow sense, deep sense? Turn the waters of sense upside down and a shallow sense is a deep sense, walk in a door that says push, turn around and it becomes a pull. The belief in something taking much more than thought to Be meaningfull will lead to just that; suit the beholder. It is choice. Most of the you's and I's want the latter, it is the Us that all ready know thought is Everything... because "Us" were once you and I divided and through Our thoughts comes Our actions, and Our actions are played Out through thought... and so We become Us... together as Everything... Omnified

[edit on 4-1-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by NowAmFound
P.S. God does not have a sex. It is a convenience to refer to God as Him. It is also common because males are often seen as the more dominant of the sexes and most people feel that it is a sign of respect to address God with the dominant pronoun "Him."

Men are just women with penises. Let Us take a trip back to the sperm and egg where We originate. It is rather unconvenient to refer to "God" as a Man. What defines dominance? Abuse? How about We start acknowledging dominant fields of the woman

[edit on 4-1-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
Men are just women with penises.

No, it's not that simple. Men are most always larger, have more body hair, a faster metabolism, different emotional responses, and different logical skill sets than women. True that women and men are both humans, but men are dominant. You can't get around that fact.

So back to the topic, God is neither male or female, but is referred to in the masculine form because we perceive this being to be more dominant than we are. Also it's easier to say Him than "the higher being".

Originally posted by dbates

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
Men are just women with penises.

No, it's not that simple. Men are most always larger, have more body hair, a faster metabolism, different emotional responses, and different logical skill sets than women. True that women and men are both humans, but men are dominant. You can't get around that fact.

Yes and No. Dominance in tales what? To Be dominant is to Be larger? To Be dominant is to have more hair? To Be dominant is to Be one side of the puzzle? Men, compared to men, have different emotional and logical skill sets, as do women to women and men to women. To claim dominance is to claim separation. Dominance creates abuse, creates upheaval, rebellion. Dominance can Be the ability to love a child, the ability to cook, the ability to knit, the ability to sing, the ability to clean the house; "dominance" is a subjective perception. Men and women are equal. There Exists no dominance. Dominance will ultimately dominate itself. Fact is relative opinion, We are all entitled to Ours, but the Word and Existence cannot Be escaped

So back to the topic, God is neither male or female, but is referred to in the masculine form because we perceive this being to be more dominant than we are. Also it's easier to say Him than "the higher being".

So We would have truth sacrificed for "simplicity"? It is all so easier to say Her than the "higher Being". The truth is to say Us, because We are God, We are Being, We are Existence. In Existence that is Being, there Exists no "higher Being"; this separate "higher Being" is an illusion.

Where does this "higher Being" reside?

[edit on 4-1-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

LastOut:

Actually, the compariston was the comparison, not an admittance of anything. Many people are confused by comparisons, though, I know.

Um, yeah, a point was missed. Everything does not play an equal role in "existence". All roles played are valuable, but not equally valuable.

On your thought discourse...you really failed to say anything meaningful. :/

On God not having a sex. I'm sorry you don't like the reasons why He is referred to as He. Most of the world is happy with it. And, did I ever say that I agreed? Chill, dude.

Originally posted by NowAmFound
LastOut:

Actually, the compariston was the comparison, not an admittance of anything. Many people are confused by comparisons, though, I know.

Um, yeah, a point was missed. Everything does not play an equal role in "existence". All roles played are valuable, but not equally valuable.

On your thought discourse...you really failed to say anything meaningful. :/

On God not having a sex. I'm sorry you don't like the reasons why He is referred to as He. Most of the world is happy with it. And, did I ever say that I agreed? Chill, dude.

Comparison is separation, separation is confusion. This explains the confusion.

To Not allow the equality of Existence to Be seen in, out, and between of itself is to miss the point of Existence.

The role of Existence is comparable only to Existence, thus Existence is Equal to Existence and all things Existing are equal.

Failure is an option, as is the thought to accept meaning.

Most of the World is spoken for through those words? No apologies necessary. Most of the World appears to Be having trouble with "God". Agreeance was Not instilled on you by any means, but these words were spoken in replication to the words you presented in the former post. What is spoken is representation of the Author, it is allowed to Be replied to, is it Not?

Preference is of a warm atmosphere, Not overly chilled, Not overly heated, just warm

[edit on 4-1-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

LastOut: You're hilarious!

"The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth."
from The Tao Te Ching


The name God is not God. This is likley to deep for most of you.
You cannot name the nameless