Doppler

I know this will probably get shot down rather quickly, but I know the only way to expand my understanding of something is to toss it out there....so that's what I'll do.

If God exists on a seperate plane/realm of existence, perhaps we could say even subsists rather than exists....then wouldn't it be impossible to define him? And if it is impossible to define him, and any mere human interpretation we may have of a god is then false or at bare minimum unreliable or unprovable, then wouldn't it be safe to say that ALL religions are wrong? The very base of every religion I have encountered has a definition of God by which they develop their entire belief system on. If you can't define something, then how can your belief system be right or even viable by standards other than human? (teaching that killing is wrong or immoral is an example of human standards of today being viable to today's society).

Does that make sense?

beastmaster

Yes, it does make sense, Doppler -- you've basically described strong agnosticism.

Please note that not all religions attempt to define god. In fact, Taoism begins with the premise that, whatever god may be, it transcends human comprehension and language -- the proper religious approach is not through reductionistic parsing of language and dogma to futilely attempt to "understand" god and his supposed plan, but rather through a non-cerebral connectedness with the world. Some schools of Buddhism are similar, except that Buddhism seems to emphasize disconnectedness from the world -- but maybe disconnectedness is the same thing as connectedness in a Zen sort of way.

That's why some people think of these Eastern religions as being non-theistic.