Could God become man?

[paul]

I think this is even an insulting question, not to Christians but to God.

God is after all God, if it was His will to become even one of us, then surely as God it is possible.
And if we say not, then isn't us who would limit God as being God, and limit Him to mans limit, and maybe mans mind.

I have heared some say God could not become man, for who would rule the world.
As if God has to be in one place at one time, as a human's limits.

But if we pray to God, many of us in different countries, and surely there must be many of us praying at even the exact same time, does God only hear one single person.
Is God only in one single part of the world at a time, only with one person at a time.

I beleive one God, could be ruler of the world, and come to us as one of us if He pleased.
I beleive it would not be an impossibilty for God, to both be a man, and God.
Being both the man on earth, and God in Heaven at the exact same time, I don't think that an impossibility for God

It may be a hard thing to comprehend, but if God wanted to become one of us, to be born of a virgin, to come into this world through a woman, to be born as all humans are in human form, to live among us, and to even prepared to die the most brutal death, as if even a criminal, spat on and humiliated as if even a blasphemer of God, a madman even.
Then could He not, if He so wished to do so?

[Thomas]

Hello Paul ... and amen.

It's interesting to see just how often it appears as if it is man who determines just what God can and cannot do.

The turning point for C.S. Lewis, when arguing with friends that Jesus Christ was all a myth, was the simple question, "but what if it were true?"

Thomas

[Muslimwoman]

Hi Paul

While I do not accept Jesus (pbuh) as the son of G-d, I have to agree that G-d can do anything He wishes.

Have these people not heard of the term Omni (from the Latin omnis = all)? G-d is not limited in anything, as we humans are.

Salaam

[wil]

Originally Posted by Thomas

"but what if it were true?"

Couldn't the same be said for Hinduism, or Islam or whatever....the what if it were true argument is so terribly weak, grasping at the last straw in my mind.

Originally Posted by paul

I think this is even an insulting question, not to Christians but to God.

So if that is what you think why would you insult? Or if your answer is to explore, to contemplate, don't you think that is exactly what everyone else that asked is as well, therefor also not an insult?

It seems to me that one cannot insult G!d, in order to be insulted the insultee would need to accept it, or take afront in some way....I don't see G!d worrying about any such question.

As discussed if one has an omnipotent view of G!d, G!d could. If one has an omnipresent view of G!d, G!d's presence is in all of us. But the real debate in our world the one that separates the religions is not if G!d could but if G!d did.

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

Originally Posted by wil

...the what if it were true argument is so terribly weak, grasping at the last straw in my mind.

I don't think we can classify C.S. Lewis, or the Inklings, as intellectual lightweights. Maybe the argument goes deeper than you appreciate?

Originally Posted by wil

It seems to me that one cannot insult G!d, in order to be insulted the insultee would need to accept it, or take afront in some way....I don't see G!d worrying about any such question.

Do you believe in a deist idea then, in the deus absconditus? If such is the case, it does rather make a mockery of salvation, justice and mercy, love thy neighbour ... in fact it knocks the whole Abrahamic shtick into a cocked-hat.

Originally Posted by wil

G!d's presence is in all of us.

This strikes me as a much weaker argument, for example.

If God is in us, and we went wrong, not a very clever God, is He?

If God is in me, why am I not omniscient & omnipotent?
Either God is not omniscient nor omnipotent,
God is omniscient and omnipotent, but subject to me.

If God is in me,
How can we make mistakes? That must mean God can make mistakes.

Arguments like that.

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Hi Wil —


I don't think we can classify C.S. Lewis, or the Inklings, as intellectual lightweights. Maybe the argument goes deeper than you appreciate?

If God is in us, and we went wrong, not a very clever God, is He?

If God is in me, why am I not omniscient & omnipotent?
Either God is not omniscient nor omnipotent,
God is omniscient and omnipotent, but subject to me.

If God is in me,
How can we make mistakes? That must mean God can make mistakes.

Arguments like that.

Thomas

Namaste Thomas,

I agree they are no intellectual lightweights, that is why it baffles me. Of all the discussions they are to be swayed by "what if it were true" Please tell me why the glories and penalties listed in the Koran or the Vedas after all the intellectual discussion was finished folks would role over and convert because someone stood up and said "What if it were true".... I think it lame, you think it deep...enlighten me as to why it can't be used to prove anything...which means it proves nothing...

So you don't believe G!d's presence to be within you? Don't go for omnipresence? Free will says we can ignore it....many do. It doesn't diminish G!d in my eyes...it may in others...back to free will again.

Originally Posted by thomas

Do you believe in a deist idea then, in the deus absconditus? If such is the case, it does rather make a mockery of salvation, justice and mercy, love thy neighbour ... in fact it knocks the whole Abrahamic shtick into a cocked-hat.

afraid I'm lost with the latin, and don't understand the colloquialisms.... I believe in G!d, just not one that is petty, jealous, vengeful...I believe those to be human emotions attributed to G!D because some can't imagine the breadth and scope of all that is....

[Gatekeeper]

It is my view that the fullness of God was in Christ bodily, but to me that doesn't suggest that he was God himself. For example, Christ experienced the human struggle fully, and was perfectly capable of falling short of perfection. That was his human nature, yet he also had a divine nature which he embraced fully. It was God in him that enabled him to live a perfect life. He was 'conceived' by the Holy spirit, whereas we can only 'recieve' it in measure. This is why we still make mistakes, and christ did not. He had the fullness of deity 'within' him.

The Spirit of God is in us, or at least available to us all. It is up to us to receive, embrace, follow.


James

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by wil

If one has an omnipresent view of G!d, G!d's presence is in all of us.

Indeed. The question supposes a separation between God and man. Should the two be considered in this dualistic manner? Is God “separate” from man and hence the universe? Or is God omnipresent? If God is omnipresent then is not God already in man and man already in God? Only when we personalise God into a separate entity are we able to ask a question such as "Could God become man?"


s.

[earl]

Amen brother Snoop. earl

[paul]

Originally Posted by wil

It seems to me that one cannot insult G!d, in order to be insulted the insultee would need to accept it, or take afront in some way....I don't see G!d worrying about any such question.

As discussed if one has an omnipotent view of G!d, G!d could. If one has an omnipresent view of G!d, G!d's presence is in all of us. But the real debate in our world the one that separates the religions is not if G!d could but if G!d did.

I don't think asking such a question insults God directly.
I tried to explain what I said in my whole post.
Sorry I didn't do it very good.

I think it insults God as God, if you know what I mean.
Asking this question could God, in that I think it insults God as God, as if we say God can't.
I find it takes from Him being God, and we say He can't.

I've not put forward if God did, I purposely put forward "could God become man?"

It's not a question I'm asking, but to just put into peoples minds if possible.

As I also mentioned in my first post that I have heared some say God could not become man, and I recall said something like, how could God be man and be God in Heaven or ruling the world.

For me it's of course God could, for how can we say it's not possible with God.

I suppose I'm just addressing an argument I've heard of saying God couldn't.

To say you don't beleive He did is one thing, but to say it's not possible for Him to do so, that I find an insult to God as God.

[paul]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Indeed. The question supposes a separation between God and man. Should the two be considered in this dualistic manner? Is God “separate” from man and hence the universe? Or is God omnipresent? If God is omnipresent then is not God already in man and man already in God? Only when we personalise God into a separate entity are we able to ask a question such as "Could God become man?"
s.

I don't think man is God, I don't know that any religion does does it?

I think man in God, and God in man, is when we abide in His love.

But to say I or you are God, I find a great error.

The question is could God become man, not just us willingly submitting to His love, but God Himself be born as a human and live in this world as such.

I suppose I put forward, could God become man, as traditional Christianity teaches?
Some have said, that's impossible.
But such a response I find dismisses God as being God.

[Abdullah]

God never does anything beneath His majesty, thus it is impossible [in the sense for God to become 'inferior' by doing something beneath His grandeur and majesty] for God to become a man.

God ALLWAYS remains above anything man could ever imagine, thus God can never even remotely become a man or anything that man could ever concieve of. God allways remains above whatever man associates with Him [of his thinking]; even Gods attributes, such as Him being, the All-Mercifull, The Hearing, The seeing, etc, have no modality to them.

We beleive in Gods attributes, but associate not even any kind of modality [i.e, they are nothing like we can ever imagine] to them.

A verry quintessential creedal statement in Islam is "AllahuAkbar", which means, "God is greater [than whatever man could think of]".

Peace.

[dattaswami1]

Originally Posted by paul

I think this is even an insulting question, not to Christians but to God.

God is after all God, if it was His will to become even one of us, then surely as God it is possible.
And if we say not, then isn't us who would limit God as being God, and limit Him to mans limit, and maybe mans mind.

I have heared some say God could not become man, for who would rule the world.
As if God has to be in one place at one time, as a human's limits.

But if we pray to God, many of us in different countries, and surely there must be many of us praying at even the exact same time, does God only hear one single person.
Is God only in one single part of the world at a time, only with one person at a time.

I beleive one God, could be ruler of the world, and come to us as one of us if He pleased.
I beleive it would not be an impossibilty for God, to both be a man, and God.
Being both the man on earth, and God in Heaven at the exact same time, I don't think that an impossibility for God

It may be a hard thing to comprehend, but if God wanted to become one of us, to be born of a virgin, to come into this world through a woman, to be born as all humans are in human form, to live among us, and to even prepared to die the most brutal death, as if even a criminal, spat on and humiliated as if even a blasphemer of God, a madman even.
Then could He not, if He so wished to do so?

An ignorant person neglects Mahatma Gandhi seeing his cheap cloth. He cannot estimate the real value of Gandhi. He will give lot of value to a cinema actor who is in a colorful dress. Similarly when the Lord comes in the human body, which follows all the rules of the nature, an ignorant person insults Him seeing the ordinary human body, since he does not recognize the value of the internal form. This is told in Gita (Avajaananti Mam Mudhaah). The Lord can make His body to be divine and above the rules of nature by His super power. But He does not do this because He does not like to violate the rules of nature, since He is the creator of those rules. One will not generally contradict His own rule and insult himself.

An ordinary soul in the form of Yogi or a demon frequently exhibits his body to be beyond the rules of the nature because he is not insulted since he is not the creator of the rules of the nature. By such petty miracle the ignorant person believes such Yogi or demon as the Lord. The Lord is the ruler of Yogis (Yogeeswara). Once a saint walked on the river but Shri Rama Krishna Parahamsa who is the human incarnation of the Lord came by a boat paying one rupee. The Saint proudly told Shri Paramahamasa that he obtained the power to walk on the water by Sadhana for the past thirty years.

The saint asked Paramahamsa whether He did such tedious Sadhana in His life. Paramahamsa told simply with a smile that the cost of his thirty-year-old Sadhana is one rupee!! And that He never did such cheap Sadhana. Arjuna prostrated to the feet of Lord Krishna before all the soldiers without egoism and jealousy. Krishna was a human being like Arjuna. Moreover Krishna is only the driver where as Arjuna is the owner of the chariot. Arjuna recognized the value of the internal form of Lord Krishna and therefore Krishna revealed His inner form as Viswa Roopa to Arjuna. Therefore those people who get rid of jealousy and egoism can only give the value to the human incarnation.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by paul

I suppose I put forward, could God become man, as traditional Christianity teaches?

Then perhaps you should have put your OP in the Christianity forum?

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by earl

Amen brother Snoop. earl

Gassho, brother earl.

s.