Deity: Different, the same, or parts of a greater goal?

I like how the Native Americans avoided the personification of God by referring to it as the Great Spirit. It's not something that man can understand. Beyond our comprehension. I think trying to nail down an image onto God is a fools game.

 

Yes---I agree. Or Taoism, for example---the Tao that can be spoken is not the real Tao.

A lot of indigenous belief systems have this understanding of the ultimate. Therefore a lot of anthropologists icorrectly decided, and this is still an ongoing racist assertion in religious studies today, that there are people who are too 'primitive' to understand the belief in a supreme being or absolute divinity.

 

Not entirely sure at this point what constitutes "deity", though I suspect it is more an amalgam of all entities, but manifested in myriad ways.
But does it have to be goal oriented?

I guess the Biblical conception of God is goal oriented, but in most others, not so much.

 

Let us see if we can resist the deification of Deity. A deity would have the power to create matter from the soul of it's own presence. But the matter would need form for being some creation of contemplated goodness, beauty, or justified meaning that it be. Thus the deity creates the additional form for the value of it's, the matter's, frailty and breaking down capacity. But when should that occur for the deity's satisfaction of substantial holy expiration and determination of fulfilled purpose of coming to be and passing away? We deify the deity with pre-conceived notions of how it's supposed prefer the whole act of being to be determined for self-satisfaction: I am who I am for the deities accomplished deification. But I didn't want to deify; I wanted to merely spiritually accept the deity into my living passage of time for the being per say. Am I the deity? It is no for me as much as by it.

Thus the Deity is just something which fights my purposelessness with a purpose imposed by the 'the greater goal', which the Deity never had: only I had. It is yes for it as much as by me.

I keep deceiving myself with this stuff.

 

I would agree with you on this point.

To attempt a definition of Deity is to take away from what it truly is.

How are most religions not goal oriented? Would you please provide some examples?

 

That portion of the mind that you rule.

 

Let me clarify my thought.

In regards to the practitioners, yes all religions are goal oriented for the practitioners, attain salvation, nirvana, oneness, etc,etc,etc.
But since your question focused on the concept of a deity, than most religions do not have a deity with specific goals as such as the Biblical God does.
Many belief systems have a non-involved God or Gods, or any involvement isn't necessarily "goal oriented".
Or to put it another way, many religions do not have a beginning, middle and end series of events culminating is some main end game play such as the religions evolving from the Abrahamic source.
Buddhism for example recognizes no deity or goal that the deity is working towards, but the practitioners of Buddhism are practicing it in a goal oriented fashion.

Does that help?

 

What about paganism and the plausible devotion of Reason at property wealth and change? Science can become a religion.

 

The difference from thedope is in the appreciation of this qualifying statement,

a symbol for something we do not directly apprehend unless you do in which case you know I am in you and you are in me and as above so below.

 

Ahh I think I see what you meant now. Basically you were referring to goal orientations of gods whereas I was referring to goal orientations of man trying to understand gods. Thank you for the clarity.

 

:2thumbsup:

 

What are deities except thoughts in the mind?

 

What are we but thoughts in the mind?

 

Or, if you insist, what are we but thoughts in deity's mind?

 

Ah yes---that is correct. Oh my, words... words... words... how they get in the way...

 

Same destination, different journey.

 

Yes---that has already happened. Science is just as dogmatic as religion. It is run by its high priests, and is sturdily built institution that exiles heretics, and clings to its own prophets.

Imagine mankind 3 or 4 centuries into the future looking back at these times, exclaiming how primitive and superstitious we are with some of our crazy scientific beliefs!

 

yes, exactly, which is also why it may not be the wisest thing to automatically assume that any "supernatural" events recorded are bullshit.
I'm sure there are things that will be discovered and be common place in the future that we would consider absolutely miraculous today.
That much has certainly been borne out in just the last century.

 

Nope.

 

Nope. We are.