[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: REQUEST : RISHIS
In article <ghenDy9FtI.7zK@netcom.com>,
Joseph M. Emmanuel <maitreya@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Sep 1996 21:07:53 GMT, shrao@nyx.net (Shrisha Rao) wrote:
>
>>>But some say you have to surrender to Yahweh, Christ, Allah, etc. How can
>>>there be One God and all these claim to be Him?
>>
>>I don't see what the problem is here. Even if there is only one God,
>>there can be many claims that either oneself or some (hypothetical)
>>someone is God. You are simply assuming that every claim (or even any
>>claim) is necessarily right, and that is not logical.
>
>So you are saying the other gods are no God, but the one you say is God is
>God!
No, that is not what I am saying; please read carefully. What I was
saying was that it is not logical to claim that because there are many
claims to God, there cannot be one God.
>Isn't that what all religions claim for their God?
The singular is misapplied, perhaps?
More importantly, what does that have to do with anything?
>>>So you are saying Shiva is not God. So there are more than One God. Some
>>>lead you to Solvation (from cycle death and rebirth) and others do not.
>>
>>The Bhagavad Gita says that. As do many other types of scripture for
>>many other faiths. But usually one does not find "some lead you to
>>salvation," but One leads you to salvation, and the others do not.
>
>Another religion who's followers are the only chosen ones. Gotch ya.
Unfortunately not. Note that I didn't propound "another religion," or
any religion at all. You once again missed the point completely.
>>Wherefrom does one arrive at the inference rule that _if_ there is an
>>Omnipotent God, _then_ he/she/it is formless, etc.? Also note that I
>>would object that such an entity, were it to exist, would have the
>>flaws of not have a form or name, and thus, your "God" is postulated
>>with two flaws inherent in his/her/its character.
>
>These are not flaws. You chose to call them such. He is also Everything.
>So He is indeed All Forms, Names, Shapes, etc. My God Has No Flaws:).
The main point is still not answered: wherefrom did you get the notion
that *if* there is an Omnipotent God, *then* he/she/it is formless?
What is the basis for this inference?
Also, what is your notion of "flaw"? Perhaps if we can agree upon a
definition of the same, we can make progress towards an agreement
whether formlessness is a flaw or not, and whether something that is
formless can also be all forms, etc.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
> -Joseph (maitreya@worldnet.att.net)
