nightwolf wrote:Not even close Qmark, I believe in God, just not the typical version of Christianity.
So . . . are you going to tell us your particular version?
|
|
[
nightwolf wrote:Not even close Qmark, I believe in God, just not the typical version of Christianity.

sandra wrote:Hi, welcome to the board at1with0![]()
Very good insight, I like how you put that in terms. The contents change, not the totality. Infact in my mind I can take that alot of different places.

at1with0 wrote:sandra wrote:Hi, welcome to the board at1with0![]()
Very good insight, I like how you put that in terms. The contents change, not the totality. Infact in my mind I can take that alot of different places.
Thanks for the warm welcome sandra.
What I wrote could be construed as a definition of God but, for me, it is the output of the input where the input is my perception of God. The description of God takes into account that perhaps there is nothing in (1) and (3), say, if the only thing that really exists is in category (2).
Any two all-encompassing things must be congruent and the thing I have described is all-encompassing. So if God is all-encompassing, then this is God.
Return to Religion & Spirituality
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests