Has anyone seen God?

[Eccles1:2]

For:

So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared."

 

The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent.

 

Against:

No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.

 

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

 

 

Christians, what are your views?

[Mr. Neil]

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/seen.html

[Reach]

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/seen.html

Thanks, Neil, that's exactly the page I was looking for.

 

Are you reading my mind again? ;-)

 

This particular question, when I was a Christian, was one of the most difficult I ever wrestled with. The issue is a simple one and the verses are very clear on this. This remained something I could never reconcile.

[Mr. Neil]

Thanks, Neil, that's exactly the page I was looking for.

 

Are you reading my mind again? ;-)

I'm clairvoyant I guess.

[IAm_Lucifer]

Christians, what are your views?

 

My girlfriend says she has seen god.

[Abiyoyo]

For:

Against:

Christians, what are your views?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The Bible talks about Moses turning around, from the presence of God, in which his face still glowed very brighly, then they put a veil over his face, to help the glow.

 

Jacob fought with something, but jacob called this "person" God, not God proclaiming it.

 

Gen 32:24-31

24 And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

25 And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.

26 And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.

27 And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob.

28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.

29 And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there.

30 And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

31 And as he passed over Penuel the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh.

(KJV)

 

Jacob may have wrestled with God, but would God refer to the one who send him as Himself. Look at verse 28

[Abiyoyo]

Thanks, Neil, that's exactly the page I was looking for.

 

Are you reading my mind again?   ;-)

 

This particular question, when I was a Christian, was one of the most difficult I ever wrestled with. The issue is a simple one and the verses are very clear on this. This remained something I could never reconcile.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I could actually say that God many times appeared to abraham in various forms, with the exception of Sodom, in which they wore "hoods" over there faces. Another thing to possibly research are the Books of Apocryphonia. I actually put my thoughts about these "rejected books" in another thread I satrted, any how, Jesus said the disciples "knew" the mystery of the kingdom of God, correct. Well, with that, the disciples, possibly by the rejected "documents of Johns apocryphon, would make perfect sense in this. All these "have not" seen God are from the disciples. The OT God according to the Apocryphon of John was not the Light, Truth, Imfallible One, but created nevertheless the world we live in and us. The "perfect aeon" of Jesus was supposedly the True light, and Imfallible spirits deliever for our guide and teachings and instruction. Just a thought, makes sense though.

[Fweethawt]

Does anyone know the origin of the phrase, "Beating around the bush." ?

[Eponymic]

Does anyone know the origin of the phrase, "Beating around the bush." ? 

 

It's relative apparently, because in YoYo's dictionary it translates as "Common Practice."

[Purple Rhino]

I could actually say that God many times appeared to abraham in various forms, with the exception of Sodom, in which they wore "hoods" over there faces. Another thing to possibly research are the Books of  Apocryphonia. I actually put my thoughts about these "rejected books" in another thread I satrted, any how, Jesus said the disciples "knew" the mystery of the kingdom of God, correct. Well, with that, the disciples, possibly by the rejected "documents of Johns apocryphon, would make perfect sense in this. All these "have not" seen God are from the disciples. The OT God according to the Apocryphon of John was not the Light, Truth, Imfallible One, but created nevertheless the world we live in and us. The "perfect aeon" of Jesus was supposedly the True light, and Imfallible spirits deliever for our guide and teachings and instruction. Just a thought, makes sense though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Once is a typo twice calls for a spelling lesson. I believe you meant to use Infallible.

 

And to comment on 'makes sense' ... No it makes no sense. I don't believe even you could explain how your statement makes sense. But please try.

 

PR

[Philosopher Dave]

So......I guess the O.T. concept of 'the Angel of the Lord' doesn't play a part in the equation? Actually, I think it does, but since I'm a philosopher and only interested in discussion, I'm not going to do much homework for anyone else.

 

Rather than saying that the bible is equivocal on this point (seeing/not seeing), I think it would be more apt to say that the Jewish ideology of the time inconsistently used figurative language and/or utilized theological implications, thus making the overall reception of the biblical collection of text unclear to a more modern reader who is used to a more scientific and static approach to language use. The point being this, in places where it says that people saw God, in some places it specifically states that the Angel of the LORD appeared to such and such person, and in other places, it simply says that someone saw God. But the implication at those points is that they were actually seeing the Angel of God, the direct representative of the Infinite/Invisible God.

[♦ ficino ♦]

The anthropologist Jules Henry, in his book, Jungle People, on an Amazon tribe, wrote that someone from the tribe every so often would come back to the encampment from a foray into the jungle and say things like "I saw Howler Monkey." Not an individual, living howler monkey, but the god/spirit of howler monkeys in general.

 

so--

1. Are there at least two gods in the universe: Jehovah and Howler Monkey?

or

2. Do we accept that OT people saw the true divinity Jehovah and/or his angel, but the Amazon tribesmen do not see a true divinity because

a. they are lying but the OT record is truthful

b. they are mistaken but the OT witnesses were not mistaken

c. they saw a demon but the OT witnesses saw God or an angel

or

3. both the ancient Hebrews and the Amazon tribesmen are reporting experiences that are not caused by spiritual entities but by natural causes known to scientists but interpreted acc. to the apparatus of ancient Hebrew and 20th century Amazon culture

or

4. both had experiences caused by natural causes not yet known to scientists (e.g. there's a race of "higher" beings somewhere that appear as aliens or whatnot)

or

5. they're both lying

 

I go with 3, possibly 5. I see no reason other than religious preconceptions to go with 1 or 2. About 4 I can't comment. 5 is possible and even under some circumstances likely, but a bit uncharitable.

 

In any case, people who talk about seeing or hearing God do great damage when they try on the basis of that to promote legislation or otherwise exert control over other people's lives, as fundies are increasingly emboldened to do. This must be resisted.

[Loren]

In any case, people who talk about seeing or hearing God do great damage when they try on the basis of that to promote legislation or otherwise exert control over other people's lives, as fundies are increasingly emboldened to do.  This must be resisted.

Enter the apostle Paul, stage left...

[Eccles1:2]

Rather than saying that the bible is equivocal on this point (seeing/not seeing), I think it would be more apt to say that the Jewish ideology of the time inconsistently used figurative language and/or utilized theological implications, thus making the overall reception of the biblical collection of text unclear to a more modern reader who is used to a more scientific and static approach to language use. 

e·quiv·o·cal adj.

1. Open to two or more interpretations; ambiguous.

2. Of uncertain significance.

3. Of a doubtful or uncertain nature.

I believe this is an entirely acceptable word to use in this situation. The text is clearly open to two or more interpretations.

 

The point being this, in places where it says that people saw God, in some places it specifically states that the Angel of the LORD appeared to such and such person, and in other places, it simply says that someone saw God.  But the implication at those points is that they were actually seeing the Angel of God, the direct representative of the Infinite/Invisible God.

 

But what of Exodus 33:11?

The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend.

This seems to be an unequivocal argument that Yahweh God did appear directly to Moses - otherwise what is the point of the clarifying phrase "as a man speaks with his friend"? How then can John go on to say unequivocally "no-one has ever seen God"? (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12) One logical conclusion would be that John did not regard the OT account as pertinent to his Christian theology, so felt no need to avoid contradicting it. But where does that leave the Bible as a whole as the authority for Christians?

[Reach]

But what of Exodus 33:11?

 

This seems to be an unequivocal argument that Yahweh God did appear directly to Moses -  otherwise what is the point of the clarifying phrase "as a man speaks with his friend"? How then can John go on to say unequivocally "no-one has ever seen God"? (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12) One logical conclusion would be that John did not regard the OT account as pertinent to his Christian theology, so felt no need to avoid contradicting it. But where does that leave the Bible as a whole as the authority for Christians?  

In trouble!

 

In support of Exodus 33:11 and God appearing to Moses, I would add Psalm 103:7 [The LORD] made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel.

 

I think that to know the ways of someone necessitates that there be some level of intimacy or closeness between the two. And as far as I was able to study, the Hebrew verb for to know, means to know intimately as in the context of sexual intimacy. That would require some literal, face-to-face communication.