Why not an anthropomorphic view of god?

[Syd the Human]

What I mean by this is not a view of seeing god looking like a human, and/or having human like qualities.

He is described as such in the Bible, yet many christians (myself included at one point) chose not to view him in this matter. Why? Why did we change in this view?

 

[Sayre]

Anytime I see an anthropomorphised God I know that man has created this God.

 

[Johnnz]

We need some relevant imagery to understand anything about God. God is not completely one-on-one analogous to whatever meataphors and projections of our humanity we impose onto Him (God is Spirit) but that is how we do gain some comprehension of of The Godhead whom we follow.
John
NZ

 

[variant]

What I mean by this is not a view of seeing god looking like a human, and/or having human like qualities.

He is described as such in the Bible, yet many christians (myself included at one point) chose not to view him in this matter. Why? Why did we change in this view?

The anthropomorphizing speaks more, I think, to the person describing the God.

The basis for God as an explanation is that agency is ascribed to the universe, agency like ones own intelligence.

This is an odd thought in my opinion, because, if a God exists that can make universes, wouldn't there be the distinct possibility that it would be utterly incomprehensible?

 

[Syd the Human]

We need some relevant imagery to understand anything about God. God is not completely one-on-one analogous to whatever meataphors and projections of our humanity we impose onto Him (God is Spirit) but that is how we do gain some comprehension of of The Godhead whom we follow.
John
NZ

But how do you distinguish what is used to help us understand and what is actually true? In almost everything that I have read in the Bible, he is described as a person. But then we theorize that the Bible was just trying to make us understand something. What scripture is used for this? I mean, a spirit can take the exact shape of a person, I assume.

 

[Syd the Human]

The anthropomorphizing speaks more, I think, to the person describing the God.

The basis for God as an explanation is that agency is ascribed to the universe, agency like ones own intelligence.

This is an odd thought in my opinion, because, if a God exists that can make universes, wouldn't there be the distinct possibility that it would be utterly incomprehensible?

But he is described as a person in the Bible. Jesus is sitting in a throne right next to god, so wouldn't god be sitting as well? We keep theorizing that it means something else but I just don't see where we were basing our idea of it.

 

[variant]

But he is described as a person in the Bible. Jesus is sitting in a throne right next to god, so wouldn't god be sitting as well? We keep theorizing that it means something else but I just don't see where we were basing our idea of it.

Consider that the Bible is effective because it plays on peoples innate biases.

Or read Ezekiel:

 

[Syd the Human]

Consider that the Bible is effective because it plays on peoples innate biases.

I know that, but why do we assume that it was based off of people's innate biases? What are we basing this random view on? Why do we make this distinction on this point? I mean, I think both fundamentalists and progressives have this view so it's not just on how one reads the Bible.

 

[variant]

I know that, but why do we assume that it was based off of people's innate biases? What are we basing this random view on? Why do we make this distinction on this point? I mean, I think both fundamentalists and progressives have this view so it's not just on how one reads the Bible.

Random? There is nothing random about it. Speak with some religious people about how they feel about the family imagery in the Bible and the idea of a personal God.

These are direct appeals to peoples sensibilities. It aids in what religion is FOR.

God is just like you and he loves you <- wins

God is impossibly complex and incomprehensibly forighn

 

[Syd the Human]

Consider that the Bible is effective because it plays on peoples innate biases.

Or read Ezekiel:

"26 Above the large covering that was over their heads there was something that looked like a throne, and looked like it was made of sapphire. Sitting on the throne was what looked like a man. 27 Then I saw that there was something like shining brass from the center of his body and up to his head. It looked like fire all around within it. And from the center of his body and down to his feet I saw something like fire. There was a bright light shining all around Him."

So god is described as having the shape of a man, with a body and head. There was a lot of light in and around him. So he is still shaped like a man with other attributes to him.

Example: (I like sci-fi)

A cyborg, something that is part man and part machine. Although there are certain parts that make him not man-like, he is still considered a man.

So back to this, god has certain things that make him look different, but he is still in a man form, so why not view his appearance as a human?

 

[variant]

"26 Above the large covering that was over their heads there was something that looked like a throne, and looked like it was made of sapphire. Sitting on the throne was what looked like a man. 27 Then I saw that there was something like shining brass from the center of his body and up to his head. It looked like fire all around within it. And from the center of his body and down to his feet I saw something like fire. There was a bright light shining all around Him."

So god is described as having the shape of a man, with a body and head. There was a lot of light in and around him. So he is still shaped like a man with other attributes to him.

The picture is of a non anthropomorphic angel in Ezekiel.

Example: (I like sci-fi)

A cyborg, something that is part man and part machine. Although there are certain parts that make him not man-like, he is still considered a man.

So back to this, god has certain things that make him look different, but he is still in a man form, so why not view his appearance as a human?

Because it opens you to questions about what need Gods have for various appendages?

 

[Syd the Human]

The picture is of a non anthropomorphic angel in Ezekiel.

But he said that is was of the Lord.

"26 Above the large covering that was over their heads there was something that looked like a throne, and looked like it was made of sapphire. Sitting on the throne was what looked like a man. 27 Then I saw that there was something like shining brass from the center of his body and up to his head. It looked like fire all around within it. And from the center of his body and down to his feet I saw something like fire. There was a bright light shining all around Him.

28 This light shining around Him looked like the rainbow in the clouds on a day of rain.

This was what the shining-greatness of the Lord looked like. And when I saw it, I fell on my face and heard a voice speaking."



Because it opens you to questions about what need Gods have for various appendages?

That is a good question

 

[Paradoxum]

The most reasonable view of a creator is that it would be timeless and spacesless... thus no body.

 

[Adhmar]

8Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10“Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. 11“Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves. 12“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. 13“Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14“If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. John 14:8-10

Everything you feel as a Man is God the Father. God the father is the light and the darkness. He is righteous because he controls himself and doesn't sin. The devil tempts you too far to the right or the left off God's righteous path. Jesus is the light in the darkness so that when we upset God the Father because of our sin and harlotry he doesn't completely destroy us with fire. Nukes. He has a spirit which has no form other than a cloud.

Man is God's Glory, made in his image. Notice in the old testament God calls Israel harlots and prostitute because of their idolatry. Idolatry is like adultery to God. He is a Man of War (exodus 15:3) and Love. The Earth sits between Mars (God of War) and Venus (Goddess of Love). Coincidence or God? Women are meant to know only one Man like we are meant to know only one God. When girls lose their virginity at 13 and get passed around like tradable concubines (Baal Worship/Feminism) it becomes hard to have mutual trust between the sexes and real Love breaks down. For girls to be sexually promiscuous, then we must have adopted a false idol because that is not God's way. (1 Corinthians 11:3)

God has a heart, feelings, and emotions. You learn about this as you read through the old testament. Sex for God is when Man twists and shouts for him. We can be like David and dance and worship him, love him, and keep his commandments, or we risk his wrath when he fall into idolatry. Men don't treat prostitutes very well do that? Like father like son. God gets his one way or the other.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Gods are commonly viewed in anthropomorphic view. Probably because humans find 'visual' easier to focus. (Think of television running radio out of the drama/comedy business.) Most all gods have some 'visual' aspect. Commonly, this has been accomplished by idols.

Why human? Frankly, a woman with large - assets - is far more approachable and 'cuddly' than Cthulhu. However, the human shape is not exclusive. There are bulls, snakes, birds and all sorts of animals - real and imaginary - who have been worshiped as gods.

Christianity and the parent religion Judaism expressly forbid the making of 'idols'. The Jewish people traditionally don't even have 'pictures', as it comes too close to the 'graven image' (idol) forbidding in the Decalogue. Christianity has loosened up on the picture thing; we don't consider 'art' as an idol.

However, the Bible does indeed describe the Creator God who fired up this whole shebang. The description is not a physical one, height, weight, color of eyes and such, but a listing of factors of emotion, thought, intent and so forth.

For instance, the Bible mentions God loving His people. He becomes angry when provoked. He is jealous (in the same sense a married person expects fidelity from the spouse). He obvious has thought processes. He has the resources to carry out His plans and desires (His Will). (Appendages seemingly not required.)

God is not inscrutable. He communicates His plans and desires for mankind. He is limitless and beyond grasp in that sense. Much like humans cannot truly comprehend the distance to the Galactic Core, but we get the idea it's a right far piece. But the idea humanity cannot grasp the basic concepts of God is simply not true.

Presuming one wants to do so.

 

[Uncle Mikey]

God is Quantum.

Kinda hard to quantify in a sound byte.

 

[Huntun]

Webster Dictionary

Full Definition of QUANTUM

1
a : quantity, amount
b : portion, part
c : gross quantity : bulk
2
a : any of the very small increments or parcels into which many forms of energy are subdivided
b : any of the small subdivisions of a quantized physical magnitude (as magnetic moment)
​

Wikipedia:

Quantum:

In physics, a quantum (plural: quanta) is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be "quantized," referred to as "the hypothesis of quantization".[1] This means that the magnitude can take on only certain discrete values.
​

What would it mean for a God to be quantum?

 

[quatona]

What I mean by this is not a view of seeing god looking like a human, and/or having human like qualities.

He is described as such in the Bible, yet many christians (myself included at one point) chose not to view him in this matter. Why? Why did we change in this view?

If - as it seems is a common traits to all god concepts - a god is supposed to be an explanation that we can comprehend, and on top a provider of meaning, purpose, hope etc., a god is necessarily more or less anthropomorphic, or else it couldn´t serve these functions.
IOW: a god that we can relate to must be - at least to a certain degree - anthropomorphic.
Now, one might postulate the existence of a god that we can´t relate to...but, well, that would mean we can´t relate to it, and that means it would be completely irrelevant for any given intent or purpose.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Mortals deem that the gods are begotten as they are,
and have clothes like theirs, and voice and form.
But if cattle and horses and lions had hands
or could paint with their hands and create works such as men do,
horses like horses and cattle like cattle
also would depict the gods' shapes and make their bodies
of such a sort as the form they themselves have.
Ethiopians say that their gods are snubnosed and black
Thracians that they are pale and red-haired.

Xenophanes (570 &#8211; 480 BC)