If we base ourselves on the fact that God is a being that cannot be described with words and has no name, that implies that every God of every God of Western and Eastern religion is a lesser being, including the entities that are on planes beyond every imaginable concept, because they can still be described. If your God can be described in any way, if it can be described with words, even if it is described as a primordial entity that encompasses everything, it is not the real God.
>>39652757>t. shill for Amun's monoreligion
this is true and it goes beyond that even.every time you attempt to intellectually understand god, you are trying to put it in a box because that's what the human brain does, therefore limiting the possibilities. This is why it's better to not think about god at all. let it be. and refuse anyone who claims to know or understand god, what they know and understand isn't god
>>39652757>>39652929This anon gets it
although at the same time doesn’t fully grasp itAs you can better see a ghost by putting a blanket on it but the ghost is not the blanket the blanket is just a tool to better know what can’t actually be known it’s quiet paradoxical but it makes perfect sense if you’re schitzo enough to get your own divine nature
>>39653031>>39653058Also fun fact before chaos and its symbol got an edgelord make over it use to just mean the breath of life/god and it’s infinite choices/experiences basically it’s infinite nature and the ogdoad praise KEKhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogdoad_(Egyptian)Wish I could find the right pic that shows the octagram as 2 squares making a divided circle in between them as the chaos sign but can’t seem to
>>39652757I think that the eye of horus has more to do with the eye of the sahara/richat structure
>>39652757what's the difference with this and believing in the void? it aligns with the koran, which says allah is beyond attributes. by contrast st augustine and st thomas aquinas had a charism that showed them the attributes of the Trinity. but this can't be right. allah prevents anthropomorphism (as in a horse would believe in horse-gods) by saying he has no attributes. i guess you could believe in this God, but it's definitely Muslim. i think it still speaks to the truth of Buddhism, that the Most High cannot be described
>>39653350All religions point to the same thing Do not stare at the man pointing but go where he directs
>>39653350lol here’s a well renowned catholic expressing true gnosis That one can find in all things I’d argue the Tao te Ching is the best book on it the void being the Tao known in Hebrew as AyinAbyss comes from Hebrew ayinbeis meaning the house of the eye or the house of nothing or breaking open the eye or breaking open nothing
>>39653350>believingdrop that stupid word and mindset, you cannot "belief" or "not belief"believes are animalistic human constructsits not about believing, its about BEING
>>39653460
cool thread though, trippy dream I am having
I AM THE DREAMER /x/and I have a name, a house, dogs, social media etc etc, I am just like you
>>39653460>>39653474This trinity can be seen here aswell >>39653306Ayin =Nun singular male and naunet plural femaleRepresenting the nothing that is everything in unconscious form Ayin SophHeh and Hauhet The infinite awareness aka time before relativity Ain Soph Aur Kek and Kauket Darkness to light relativity which is funny cause he’s worshipped here as chaos but he’s quiet the opposite And Amun and Amaunet represent the self where all the above collide into one These are the 4 worlds/realms1 earth/body/action3 heavensessence/fire/feelingarchetype/air/letters form/water/word
>>39653438do you think buddhist gnosis and catholic gnosis are the same?
>>39653565Also Forgot to add ayin soph is the nothing that is everything in conscious formAnd Ayin Soph Aur is the everything that is nothing that comes from the play of ayin and ayin sophThe conscious and unconscious nothing that is everything
>>39653408>>39653573Same thing diffrent perception something something 4 blind men describing an elephant
>>39653610Most religious people especially those who go to church don’t get past the first heaven of idolatry this is where one thinks there god is the god 2nd heaven archetype is where one sees there god in many gods this may be when one sees god in themselfs 3rd heaven.the top feel free to reverse these numbers if you want as one can seem more mighty then 3 Is where one realizes the true nature of god being both self and not self nothing and everything
>>39653599do you think meditating in the ein sof brings you to a gnosis that is beyond God and his Tree of Life?
>>39653649Anon meditating is meditating If you’re thinkingyou aren’t meditating You’re contemplating Don’t convolute meditation with weird ceremonies and rituals leave that to the idolaters Knowledge gnosis is just a consequence of the active practice of meditation via synchronization Every time you meditate and reach pure silence and stillness you touch god that lives within you the nothing that is everything The more you do this the more you harmonize with the everything that is nothing reality which will guide you to the ultimate knowledge of yourself which is both everything and nothing
Om
Nom
>>39652757God is a singularity, a singularity is the collapse of dualistic dynamics, meaning it's paradoxical, that's why it can't be "explained", it's ineffable.A singularity contains everything in existence in it, and its projected field is reality itself, the singularity projecting itself. Of course, this field is also full of other singularities (like yourself) that act as mirrors for the emanating local singularity (God), which in turn forms a fractal cascade, meaning you are the God of your microcosm. This goes on and on indefinitely as you'd expect from a fractal acting as a self referential feedback loop.
>>39652757Who says you cant describe God with words?If God is real and he made the world and humanity, would he not communicate with them? And if he did communicate with them would he not explain himself and his attributes, and guide his creation to fulfill his will? Your foolishly assuming God wouldn't speak when in reality basic logic would show that God would speak. Give me one reason why God wouldn't communicate with us?
>>39656078Your "basic logic" stems from the idea of God being defined (limited) by your understanding. Every esoteric and even some exoteric religious models, including the abrahamic ones, state God is ineffable, so that's it.
>>39656258In the age we live in our intellect is very powerful but our intuition, not so much. The intellect can help attune our intuition however. When you hold on with your intellect that god is ineffable it implies God is unknowable, but that couldnt be further from the truth.
>>39652757This premise is already integrated into Christianity, where God is either described by the things he has in common with us (because we are made in his image) or by the second-order effects of his existence.
>>39656078ever heard god talking?yeah, me neither
>>39656353>In the age we live in our intellect is very powerful but our intuition, not so much.Asspull>When you hold on with your intellect that god is ineffable it implies God is unknowable, but that couldnt be further from the truth.You're just saying "i don't agree with you" but with extra words and not providing anything new. You defend the idea of God being knowable through intellect, so it should be easy then for you to provide an accurate description of God, since according to you its nature follows our logical models.>>39656362>(because we are made in his image)This is probably the most misinterpreted piece of text in any religious text, ever.
>>39656375yes I had a revalation as a child of the future and perfectly predicted someone elses birth and what theyd look likeI just remember closing my eyes but seeing light and then speaking and everything that came out of my mouth came true, the doctors even said it was impossible for them to be born at that time but i predicted day, time, hair color, eye color whether you believe me or not this happened to me and gave me proof of God
>>39656395I believe youI just have my own way of rationalizing it.I stand by my argument, god doesn't "talk" directly. What I mean is, something came to you, which was translated by your body into words coming out of your mouth. this something was, let's say, a divine energy.I concede that god does communicate, from my own investigations, it is usually much more subttle than commanding your body to speak the message.From my perspective, exeptions like yours tend to be a message of presense, the information itself is not relevant, what is relevant is that you acknowledge the precense and the presence confirms itself. this justifies the extraordinary method of messaging.
>>39656465I can see your point, that it is supernatural but doesn't necessarily prove the Bible, I would say this:-Sleep paralysis literal pitch black demons disappear when you say Jesus Christ-300+ "Alien" abductions have been stopped by speaking the name Jesus Christ-Aliester Crowley, known satanist drew a picture of lam which looks like an alien, big head big eyes-His protégé Jack Parsons worked for Aerojet which became Nasa, and he did rituals in which he summoned a demon that said it wanted to kill Jesus, this is written in Liber 49, his manuscript-All recorded ancient civilizations believed in a worldwide flood, Egypt, Sumeria, etc -The knights templar stepped on the cross -Every religion speaks of Jesus in some way, buddhists, muslims -In the Wikileaks emails politicians said they were going to sacrifice to moloch, a demon mentioned in the BibleAnd I could go on, but this is my evidence, aside from my own experiences that prove GodIf you question anything I wrote you can google it and do your research
>>39656465>the information itself is not relevantisnt the information the whole point if this dude said something that came true and the information he was given was true that kind of proves the whole thing>"acknowledge the precense and the presence confirms itself. this justifies the extraordinary method of messaging" just because something is supernatural doesnt mean its good, theres alot of people that hear actual voices or see things like schizos, or diviners like tarot readers
>>39652757>The Tao that can be told is not the eternal TaoIndeed indeed. the named gods are but hollow pretenders and thieves of humanities spirit energies
>>39652757Hey OP, i made that picrel, it's from this One Piece thread.https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/38244776/#38325320Nice to see my stuff get posted around :D
>>39652757You've contradicted yourself. You've given God the title of "thing that cannot be described with words". You've given him the identity of not having an identity. This places a limitation upon God. If God is all powerful, then he can at once be both knowable and unknowable. We have been given knowledge of God (the knowable) in effort of seeking out his unknowable element. That is the great quest: to find God, the great treasure, with a half torn map.
>>39657773OP is assuming that God cant be described, yet anyone can describe God, all powerful, all knowing, if not then he wouldn't be God. So automatically there is descriptions of God, then from that we also get "Good" "Loving" "Creator" because if he did create everything, then his creations are also beautiful, like the blue sky, or fluffy white clouds, or colored parrots, or dogs and cats, even lions and sharks have their beauty in representing ferocity. OP is like the teenager that took acid and thinks he understands God, but doesn't even understand basic ideas of logic
>>39652768Wrong god, try Akhenaten's Aten. The Pharoah was an SOB, one of the first SOBs in a long line of monotheist SOBs.
>>39656524Dear Christcuck, If you're paralyzed then you can't say shit!
>>39657957>ChristcuckReddit is this way.
>>39656524Aerojet was a private company, not NASA, a Gov't agency. Jack Parsons didn't work there, he worked at JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratories. The Knights Templar were Christian warrior monks, and Baphomet was just King Phillip the Fair's baseless accusation! You're a lying liar who lies! LAM doesn't have big eyes.No one sacrifices anything to Moloch (MLK) anymore, if ever! It is ancient "history", and the only mention of It is in the OT! There is Zero evidence that Its cult existed outside of the pages of the Bible.You can't "prove" your Omni-God!
>>39657957I gave 8 proofs of the Bible, I understand if you can't say Jesus Christ while in sleep paralysis, but can you respond to the Jack Parsons story?At least respond to 2 of them without being a faggot
>>39657991"Christcuck" is a part of /4chan/. What's Reddit? ;~P
>>39658040Aerojet was a private company that helped create jet rockets at JPL for Nasa to shoot into spaceThe rocket was founded by a satanist Picture related is a leak from HDR22@clintonemail.com
>>39652757No... this theological reasoning is flawed. Humanity has simply shifted the goal post as power creep has set in. You ever hear the saying that super man can leap over a tall building in a single bound, run as fast as a locomotive, etc...? Destroy the planet with a single punch or move faster than the speed of light? Languages through out history had different terms for gods and they did not all mean the same thing. And foremost was not the requirement that the god be almighty. Just hold dominion over some such phenomenon, like rain, or weather, or crops, or luck or fortune...On may claim a god false, but at the end of the day. All that it matters is that it is worshipped. That is the only really prerequisite. What need does the almighty, that want's for naughty have for beggars? Why would it defer to that which is less than for vanity? There is nothing so prestigious as godhood when you are just a slum lord.
>>39658138what
>>39652757>cannot be described with words and has no nameCan God use words to describe God?Or is God unable?Why can't God give God a name?I find you absurdly.applying the logic of the limited to the unlimited.It's how you get silly notions like "one name is limiting, so no name is greater", not seeing how no name is the ultimate limitation.
>>39658212My point is that given all the things that were gods, and had attributes, and were gods, because they were worshipped. It makes more sense to use that as a definition for godhood, and not use the term 'god' to refer to the Almighty. The Almighty being given that it is without need, or want, or definition beyond being 'Almighty' and having the capacity to change all that exist on a whim, be it past present or future should never have need of worship. The only reason why anyone is foolish enough to worship the Almighty is because they want something.
>>39658440I agreed with you until this>The only reason why anyone is foolish enough to worship the Almighty is because they want something.Wouldn't you worship the one that made the earth you stand on, and the air you breath, the one that designed your taste buds and the food you taste?Are you retarded? How could you not worship the almighty?
