خدای شخصی

از ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد
پرش به ناوبری پرش به جستجو
فارسیEnglish

یک خدای شخصی یا شخص‌وار خدایی است که می‌تواند به عنوان شخص[۱] با آن رابطه برقرار گردد، برخلاف «نیروی غیرشخصی» مانند مفهوم مطلق فلسفی، «همه» یا «زمینه هستی».

در متون مقدس ادیان ابراهیمی، خدا به عنوان خالقی شخصی توصیف شده‌است، که به صورت اول شخص صحبت می‌کند، احساساتی مثل خشم و تکبر بروز می‌دهد و گاهی در اشکال انسان‌وارانه ظاهر می‌شود.[۲] برای نمونه در تورات، خدا با پیامبران خود صحبت کرده و به آن‌ها فرمان می‌دهد، و دارای اراده، احساسات (مثل خشم، غم و شادی)، تندی و دیگر ویژگی‌های انسانی است.

روابط شخصی با خدا ممکن است به طریق مشابه روابط بین انسان‌ها (مثل پدر در مسیحیت یا دوست در تصوف) توصیف شود.[۳]

میزان اعقاد به خدای شخصی در ایالات متحده[ویرایش]

بر اساس یک نظر سنجی در مرکز پژوهش پیو(Pew) در ایالات متّحده، 60% از بزرگسالان معتقداند خدا شخصی است و افراد می‌توانند با او ارتباط برقرار کنند. 25% دیگر نیز خدا را نیرویی غیرشخصی تلقّی کرده‌اند. بر اساس نظر سنجیِ دیگری در مرکز پژوهش دیدگاه ملّی، 67% از بزرگسالان ایالات متّحده به خدای شخصی اعتقاد دارند.[۴]

دیدگاه ادیان[ویرایش]

هندوئیسم[ویرایش]

سنت‌های Vaishnava و Saiva دین هندویی در اعتقاد به ماهیت شخصی و غایی برای خدا اشتراک دارند. Vishnu Sahasranama شخص ویشنو را Paramatma (روح اعلی) و Parameshwara (خدای اعلی) قلمداد می‌کند؛ در حالی که رودرام (Rudram) همین نسبت را برای شیوا عنوان می‌کند. در الهیات کریشنا محور (کریشنا اکثراً گونه‌ای از شیوا در نظر گرفته می‌شود به استثنای Gaudiya Vaishnavas) عنوان Svagam Bhagavan منحصرا برای تشخیص صورت شخصی کریشنا استفاده می‌شود که اشاره به Gaudiya Vaishnava ، Nimbarka Sampradaya و پیروان Vallabha دارد. در حالی که شخص ویشنو و نارایانا چیزهایی هستند که از آن‌ها به عنوان خدای شخصی اصلی دیگر سنت‌های Vaishnava یاد می‌شود.[۵][۶]

مسیحیّت[ویرایش]

الهیدان مسیحی آلیستر مک کریث می‌نویسد که دلایل روشنی حاکی از مسلّم بودن مفهوم خدای شخصی در بینش مسیحی وجود دارد اما باید دانست که این در حقیقت یک قیاس است. "بیان اینکه خدا شبیه یک شخص است برای نشان دادن توان و اشتیاق الهی برای ارتباط با دیگران است. این نکته مستلزم انسان بودن خدا یا قرار گرفتن او در نقطهٔ خاصّی از جهان نیست."[۷] در مقوله تثلیث مسیحی، بر سر این مسئله که آیا روح‌القدس خدایی غیرشخصی است _که گاه توسط عده‌ای نیرویی مرتبط با قوّه برق تلقّی می‌شود[۸] _ یا خدایی شخصی[۹] مشاجره‌های بسیاری وجود دارد. عالمان روح‌شناسی در بحث روی این مسئله، یسوع (خدای پسر) و خدای پدر را دو شخص یا جنبه از یک خدای واحد در تصوّر می‌آورند: یسوع از Ousia یا جوهره‌ای همچون آن ِ خدای پدر می‌باشد که در سه شخص یا اقنوم متجلّی گشته است. (پدر، پسر و روح‌القُدُس)

علاوه بر این اعتقادات عشای ربانی و شام آخر نیز دلالت بر فهم ناحیه‌ای از دین دارد که در اکثر موارد فراتر از حدود شخصی درک می‌شوند و در نزد الهیدانان از آن با عنوان "پیکر عرفانی" یاد می‌شود.

مسیحیان ناتثلیثی منکر این هستند که یسوع اقنوم یا شمایل خدا باشد.

یهودیت[ویرایش]

الهیات یهود خدا را شخصی نمی‌داند. از سویی اشاره‌هایی به مشخصه‌های انسان‌گونه خدا در کتاب مقدس مانند "دست خدا"، وجود دارد اما یهود معتقد است این‌ها صنایع ادبی هستند و هدف از آن‌ها تنها ملموس‌تر کردن خدا برای خواننده بوده‌است. خدا فراتر از فهم بشر است و راه‌های بسیاری برای تعریف او وجود دارد. گفته شده‌است که خدا می‌تواند هم شخصی و هم غیرشخصی باشد؛ از سویی او با آفرینش خویش ارتباط دارد و از سویی وجود او فراتر از تمام روابط است.[۱۰]

اسلام[ویرایش]

در اکثر منابع اسلامی از خدا به عنوان عرضه‌کنندهٔ شفقت و عدالت یاد شده‌است. قرآن مسلمانان را امر به گرایش سوی خدا برای کسب یاری، راهنمایی و پشتیبانی می‌کند. اسلام همچنین خدا را وجودی فراتر از ادراک بشری معرّفی می‌کند و بهترین راه برقراری ارتباط با خدا را اجرای فرمان‌هایش می‌داند.[۱۱]

دیدگاه قرآن[ویرایش]

قرآن از وجود حقیقتی مطلق و یگانه سخن می‌گوید که برتر از جهان است؛ وجودی واحد و نادیدنی که مستقل از تمام آفرینش است. قرآن بروشنی با هر گونه مانند کردن خدا به آفریده‌ها مخالفت می‌ورزد؛ به عبارتی هرآنچه یک مومن به عنوان خدا در تصوّر خویش می‌آورد خدا نیست؛ چرا که خدا در حقیقت وجودی ماورائی و فراتر از تجربه است.[۱۲]

طبق بیان قرآن:

سوره اخلاص (سوره 112 : 4-1):

قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ ﴿١﴾ اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ ﴿٢﴾ لَمْ یَلِدْ وَلَمْ یُولَدْ ﴿٣﴾ وَلَمْ یَکُنْ لَهُ کُفُوًا أَحَدٌ ﴿٤﴾

بگو که خدا یکتاست (1) آن خدایی که بی‌نیاز است (2) نه زاده است و نه زاییده شده‌است (3) و نه هیچکس مثل و همتای اوست (4)

دیدگاه مذاهب اسلامی[ویرایش]

دو مذهب اسلامی شیعه و سنی در اینباره اختلافی فاحش با یکدیگر دارند. اکثر اهل تسنّن به خدایی شخصی معتقداند.[۲][۱۳]

بعضی علمای اهل تسنّن عقایدی را ابراز کرده‌اند که دلالت بر تصوّر بدن برای خدا دارد؛ اما نه از نوعی که همه می‌شناسیم. اکثر اهل تسنّن صورت، دست و پای الله را به عنوان اندام‌های جسمانی تفسیر نمی‌کنند.[۱۳] به واقع شماری حدیث در کتاب صحیح بخاری وارد شده‌است که بیان می‌دارد خدا نشانه‌ای بر ساق پای خود دارد و ساقش را بر دوزخ قرار می‌دهد و ادامه مطلب. به عنوان مثال در صحیح بخاری، نسخه انگلیسی-عربی آن، حدیث 9532، خدا با نشانه‌ای روی ساقش معرّفی شده‌است و هنگامی که ساقش را آشکار کند افراد او را خواهند شناخت. یا در همان نسخه، حدیث 9604 و 9510، گفته می‌شود الله دارای انگشتانی است. این مطالب با عناوین استعاری بکار رفته‌اند و به انگشت، دست و ساقِ حقیقی اشاره ندارند.[۱۴]

خدای شخصی توسط مذهب تشیّع شدیداً مورد ردّ و انکار قرار گرفته‌است.[۱۳] به عنوان مثال در کتاب نهج‌البلاغه، یکی از بزرگترین کتاب‌های تشیّع، چنین آمده‌است:[۱۵]

"ستایش مخصوص خداوندی است که آفرینش مخلوقش دلیل وجود او است،و حادث بودن آن‌ها دلیل ازلیت وی، و شباهت داشتن مخلوقات (به یکدیگر)،دلیل آن است که شبیه و نظیر ندارد.عقل‌ها کُنه ذاتش را درک نمی‌کنند و پرده‌ها و پوشش‌ها اصل وجودش را مستور نمی‌سازند، زیرا صانع و مصنوع با هم فرق دارد و محدودکننده و محدودشونده و پروردگار و پرورده‌شده با هم متفاوت‌اند. «یکی» است ولی نه به معنی وحدت عددی؛ بلکه به این معنا که شبیه و نظیر و مانند ندارد. «خالق و آفریننده»است اما نه این که حرکت و رنجی در این راه متحمل می‌شود، «شنوا» است ولی نه اینکه وسیله شنوایی در اختیار داشته باشد. «بینا» است ولی نه این که به وسیله ی چشم و باز کردن پلک ها، قدرت مشاهده پیدا کند.در «همه جا حاضر» است نه اینکه مماس با اشیاء باشد. از«همه جدا» است ولی نه اینکه مسافتی بین او و موجودات باشد. «آشکار»است نه با دید چشم، «پنهان» است نه به خاطر کوچکی و ظرافت، از موجودات با غلبه و قدرت جدا است، و موجودات به خاطر خضوع در برابرش و رجوع به سویش از او مباین هستند.کسی که او را با صفات مخلوقات توصیف کند محدودش ساخته، وکسی که برایش حدی تعیین کند وی را به شمارش در آورده. و آن کس که او را بشمارش آورد ازلیتش را ابطال کرده. و کسی که بپرسد، «چگونه است» توصیفش کرده و هر که بگوید: کجا است؟ مکان برای او قائل شده. «عالم»بوده آن گاه که معلومی وجود نداشت. «مالک وپروردگار» بوده، حتی آن زمان که پرورده‌ای نبود. «قادر و توانا» بوده حتی در آن زمان که مقدوری وجود نداشت."

منابع[ویرایش]

  1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's concepts of God
  2. ۲٫۰ ۲٫۱ Williams, W. Wesley, "A study of anthropomorphic theophany and Visio Dei in the Hebrew Bible, the Qur'an and early Sunni Islam", University of Michigan, March 2009
  3. "The man who realizes God as a friend is never lonely in the world, neither in this world nor in the hereafter. There is always a friend, a friend in the crowd, a friend in the solitude; or while he is asleep, unconscious of this outer world, and when he is awake and conscious of it. In both cases the friend is there in his thought, in his imagination, in his heart, in his soul.", Hazrat Inayat Khan, quoted from The Sufi Message of Hazrat Inayat Khan
  4. Smith, Tom W. (April 18, 2012). "Beliefs about God across Time and Countries". NORC at the University of Chicago. Table 3: Believing in a Personal God (2008).
  5. Delmonico, N. (2004). "The History Of Indic Monotheism And Modern Chaitanya Vaishnavism". The Hare Krishna Movement: the Postcharismatic Fate of a Religious Transplant (Columbia University Press). ISBN 978-0-231-12256-6. Retrieved 2008-04-12.
  6. Delmonico, N. (2004). "The History Of Indic Monotheism And Modern Chaitanya Vaishnavism". The Hare Krishna Movement: the Postcharismatic Fate of a Religious Transplant (Columbia University Press). ISBN 978-0-231-12256-6. Retrieved 2008-04-12. 152
  7. McGrath, Alister (2006). Christian Theology: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishing. p. 205. ISBN 1-4051-5360-1.
  8. http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/personhoodofthespirit.htm
  9. http://christianity.about.com/od/topicalbiblestudies/a/whoisholyspirit.htm
  10. http://www.jewfaq.org/g-d.htm
  11. Norcliffe (1999), p.32-33
  12. Vincent J. Cornell, Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol 5, pp.3561-3562
  13. ۱۳٫۰ ۱۳٫۱ ۱۳٫۲ Outline of Differences Between Shi'ite and Sunnit, provided by Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project
  14. Al-Islam Encyclopedia Chapter 9
  15. نهج البلاغه، خطبه 152

A personal god is a deity who can be related to as a person[1] instead of as an impersonal force, such as the Absolute, "the All", or the "Ground of Being".

In the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions, God is described as being a personal creator, speaking in the first person and showing emotion such as anger and pride, and sometimes appearing in anthropomorphic shape.[2] In the Pentateuch, for example, God talks with and instructs his prophets and is conceived as possessing volition, emotions (such as anger, grief and happiness), intention, and other attributes characteristic of a human person. Personal relationships with God may be described in the same ways as human relationships, such as a Father, as in Christianity, or a Friend as in Sufism.[3]

A 2019 survey by the Pew Research Center reported that, of U.S. adults, 70% view that "God is a person with whom people can have a relationship," while 15% believe that "God is an impersonal force."[4] A 2019 survey by the National Opinion Research Center reports that 77.5% of U.S. adults believe in a personal god.[5] The 2014 Religious Landscape survey conducted by Pew reported that 77% of U.S. adults believe in a personal god.[6]

Views

Abrahamic religions

Baha'i

In the Baha'i Faith God is described as "a personal God, unknowable, inaccessible, the source of all Revelation, eternal, omniscient, omnipresent and almighty".[7][8] Although transcendent and inaccessible directly, his image is reflected in his creation. The purpose of creation is for the created to have the capacity to know and love its creator.[9] God communicates his will and purpose to humanity through intermediaries, known as Manifestations of God, who are the prophets and messengers that have founded religions from prehistoric times up to the present day.[10]

Christianity

In the case of the Christian belief in the Trinity, whether the Holy Spirit is impersonal – or personal,[11] is the subject of dispute,[12] with experts in pneumatology debating the matter. Jesus (or God the Son) and God the Father are believed to be two persons or aspects of the same god. Jesus is of the same ousia or substance as God the Father, manifested in three hypostases or persons (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). Nontrinitarian Christians dispute that Jesus is a "hypostasis" or person of God.

Islam

Most Islamic sources teach that God is a personal God, he speaks in the Quran in first person and has personal attributes, yet the Quran still maintains that God is unique in nature and substance and has no similarity to anything else.[13] Islam also teaches that God is beyond comprehension and the best way for Muslims to have a relationship of God is to obey his commands.[14]

The Quran asserts the existence of a single and absolute truth that transcends the world: a unique and indivisible being who is independent of the entire creation.[15] The Qur'an clearly opposes conceiving God as resembling "the creation" and it maintains that whatever image a believer has of God is not God, and that he is truly transcendental. According to the Qur'an:[15]

"Say: He is God, the One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him." (Sura 112:1-4, Suraah Ikhlaas)
Thy Lord is self-sufficient, full of Mercy: if it were God's will, God could destroy you, and in your place appoint whom God will as your successors, even as God raised you up from the posterity of other people." (Sura 6:133, Yusuf Ali)

Judaism

Jewish theology states that God is not a person.[citation needed] However, there exist frequent references to anthropomorphic characteristics of God in the Hebrew Bible such as the "Hand of God." Judaism holds that these are to be taken only as figures of speech. Their purpose is to make God more comprehensible to the human reader. As God is beyond human understanding, there are different ways of describing him. He is said to be both personal and impersonal, he has a relationship with his creation but is beyond all relationships.[16]

Deism

In general, most deists view God as a personal God. This is illustrated by the 17th-century assertions of Lord Edward Herbert, universally regarded as the Father of English deism, which stated that there is one Supreme God, and he ought to be worshiped.[17] However, deism is a general belief encompassing people with varying specific beliefs, and the notion of God as a personal God cannot be ascribed to all deists.

Christian Deism

Christian deism is a term applied both to Christians who incorporate deistic principles into their beliefs and to deists who follow the moral teachings of Jesus without believing in his divinity.[18] With regard to those who are essentially deists who follow the moral teachings of Jesus, these are a subset of classical deists. Consequently, they believe in a personal God, but they do not necessarily believe in a personal relationship with God.

Classical deism

Classical deists who adhere to Herbert's common notion certainly believe in a personal God, because those notions include the belief that God dispenses rewards and punishments both in this life and after it.[17] This is not something which would be done by an impersonal force. However, a personal relationship with God is not contemplated, since living a virtuous and pious life is seen as the primary means of worshiping God.[17]

Humanistic deism

Humanistic deists accept the core principles of deism but incorporate humanistic beliefs into their faith.[19] Thus, humanistic deists believe in a personal God who created the universe. The key element that separates humanistic deists from other deists is the emphasis on the importance of human development over religious development and on the relationships among human beings over the relationships between humans and God.[19][20] Those who self-identify as humanistic deists may take an approach based upon what is found in classical deism and allow their worship of God to manifest itself primarily (or exclusively) in the manner in which they treat others. Other humanistic deists may prioritize their relationships with other human beings over their relationship with God, yet still maintain a personal relationship with the Supreme Being.

Pandeism

Pandeists believe that in the process of creating the universe, God underwent a metamorphosis from a conscious and sentient being or force to an unconscious and unresponsive entity by becoming the universe.[21] Consequently, pandeists do not believe that a personal God currently exists.

Polydeism

Polydeists reject the notion that one Supreme Being would have created the universe and then left it to its own devices which is a common belief shared by many deists. Rather, they conclude that several gods who are superhuman but not omnipotent each created parts of the universe.[22] Polydeists hold an affirmative belief that the gods who created the universe are completely uninvolved in the world and pose no threat and offer no hope to humanity.[23] Polydeists see living virtuous and pious lives as the primary components of worshiping God, firmly adhering to one of the common notions set forth by Herbert.[17] Thus, polydeists believe that there are several personal Gods. Yet, they do not believe they can have a relationship with any of them.

Scientific deism

Scientific deists believe, based on an analysis utilizing the scientific method, that a personal God created the universe. This analysis finds no evidence of a purpose God may have had for creation of the universe or evidence that God attempted to communicate such purpose to humanity. It therefore concludes that there is no purpose to creation other than that which human beings choose to make for themselves.[24] Thus, scientific deists believe in a personal God, but generally do not believe in relationships between God and human beings, since there is no proof of a purpose for creation.

Spiritual deism

Spiritual deism is a belief in the core principles of deism with an emphasis on spirituality including the connections between humans and each other, nature and God. Within spiritual deism, there is an absolute belief in a personal God as the creator of the universe along with the ability to build a spiritual relationship with God.[25] While Spiritual deism is nondogmatic, its followers generally believe that there can be no progress for mankind without a belief in a personal God.[26]

Indian religions

Hinduism

Vaishnavism and Shaivism,[27] traditions of Hinduism, subscribe to an ultimate personal nature of God. The Vishnu Sahasranama[28] declares the person of Vishnu as both the Paramatma (supreme soul) and Parameshwara (supreme God) while the Rudram describes the same about Shiva. In Krishna-centered theology (Krishna is seen as a form of Vishnu by most, except Gaudiya Vaishnavism) the title Svayam Bhagavan is used exclusively to designate Krishna in his personal feature,[29][30] it refers to Gaudiya Vaishnava, the Nimbarka Sampradaya and followers of Vallabha, while the person of Vishnu and Narayana is sometimes referred to as the ultimate personal god of other Vaishnava traditions.[31][32]

Jainism

Jainism explicitly denies existence of non-personal transcendent god and explicitly affirms existence of personal gods. All gods in Jainism are personal.

One of the major point of dispute between Digambara and Shwetambara is the gender of the gods. Digambara gods can only be men and any man of at least eight years of age can become god if he follows the right procedure.

Jain gods are eternal, but they are not beginningless. Also, Jain gods are all omniscient, but not omnipotent. They are sometimes called quasi-gods due to this reason.

Gods are said to be free from the following eighteen imperfections:[33]

  1. janma – (re)birth;
  2. jarā – old-age;
  3. triśā – thirst;
  4. kśudhā – hunger;
  5. vismaya – astonishment;
  6. arati – displeasure;
  7. kheda – regret;
  8. roga – sickness;
  9. śoka – grief;
  10. mada – pride;
  11. moha – delusion;
  12. bhaya – fear;
  13. nidrā – sleep;
  14. cintā – anxiety;
  15. sveda – perspiration;
  16. rāga – attachment;
  17. dveśa – aversion; and
  18. maraņa – death.

The four infinitudes of god are (ananta cātuṣṭaya) are:[33]

  1. ananta jñāna, infinite knowledge
  2. ananta darśana, perfect perception due to the destruction of all darśanāvaraṇīya karmas
  3. ananta sukha, infinite bliss
  4. ananta vīrya – infinite energy

Those who re-establish the Jain faith are called Tirthankaras. They have additional attributes. Tirthankaras revitalize the sangha, the fourfold order consisting of male saints (sādhus), female saints (sādhvis), male householders (śrāvaka) and female householders (Śrāvika).

The first Tirthankara of the current time cycle was Ṛṣabhanātha, and the twenty-fourth and last Tirthankara was Mahavira, who lived from 599 BCE to 527 BCE.

Jain texts mention forty-six attributes of arihants or tirthankaras. These attributes comprise four infinitudes (ananta chatushtaya), thirty-four miraculous happenings (atiśaya), and eight splendours (prātihārya).[33]

The eight splendours (prātihārya) are:[34]

  1. aśokavrikśa – the Ashoka tree;
  2. siṃhāsana– bejeweled throne;
  3. chatra – three-tier canopy;
  4. bhāmadal – halo of unmatched luminance;
  5. divya dhvani – divine voice of the Lord without lip movement;
  6. puśpavarśā – shower of fragrant flowers;
  7. camara – waving of sixty-four majestic hand-fans; and
  8. dundubhi – dulcet sound of kettle-drums and other musical instruments.

At the time of nirvana (final release), the arihant sheds off the remaining four aghati karmas:

  1. Nama (physical structure forming) Karma
  2. Gotra (status forming) Karma,
  3. Vedniya (pain and pleasure causing) Karma,
  4. Ayushya (life span determining) Karma.

And float at the top of the universe without losing their individuality and with the same shape and size as the body at the time of release.


See also

Notes

  1. ^ "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's concepts of God". Plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
  2. ^ Williams, W. Wesley, "A study of anthropomorphic theophany and Visio Dei in the Hebrew Bible, the Qur'an and early Sunni Islam", University of Michigan, March 2009
  3. ^ "The man who realizes God as a friend is never lonely in the world, neither in this world nor in the hereafter. There is always a friend, a friend in the crowd, a friend in the solitude; or while he is asleep, unconscious of this outer world, and when he is awake and conscious of it. In both cases the friend is there in his thought, in his imagination, in his heart, in his soul." Inayat Khan, quoted from The Sufi Message of Hazrat Inayat Khan
  4. ^ "Chapter 1: Religious Beliefs and Practices". U.S. Religious Landscape Survey: Religious Beliefs and Practices. Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. 1 June 2008. II. Religious Beliefs: God.
  5. ^ Smith, Tom W. (18 April 2012). "Beliefs about God across Time and Countries" (PDF). NORC at the University of Chicago. Table 3: Believing in a Personal God (2019).
  6. ^ "Most Christians Believe in a Personal God, Others Tend to See God as Impersonal Force". U.S. Public Becoming Less Religious. Pew Research Center's Religion & Public Life Project. 29 October 2015.
  7. ^ Smith, Peter (2008). An Introduction to the Baha'i Faith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 106. ISBN 0-521-86251-5.
  8. ^ Effendi, Shoghi (1944). God Passes By. Wilmette, Illinois, USA: Bahá'í Publishing Trust. p. 139. ISBN 0-87743-020-9.
  9. ^ Smith, Peter (2008). An Introduction to the Baha'i Faith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 111. ISBN 0-521-86251-5.
  10. ^ Effendi, Shoghi (1991). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette, Illinois, USA: Bahá'í Publishing Trust. pp. 113–114. ISBN 0-87743-231-7.
  11. ^ Fairchild, Mary. "Who Is the Holy Spirit? Third Person of the Trinity". Christianity.about.com. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
  12. ^ "Is the Holy Spirit a Person or an Impersonal Force?". Spotlightministries.org.uk. 8 December 1973. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
  13. ^ Quran,112 Surat al ikhlas
  14. ^ Norcliffe (1999), p.32-33
  15. ^ a b Vincent J. Cornell, Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol 5, pp.3561-3562
  16. ^ "Judaism 101: The Nature of G-d". Jewfaq.org. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
  17. ^ a b c d González, Justo L. (1985). The Reformation to the Present Day. The Story of Christianity. 2. New York, New York: HarperCollins Publishers. p. 190. ISBN 978-0-06-063316-5. LCCN 83049187.
  18. ^ "Christian Deism". Enlightenment Deism. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  19. ^ a b Jone, Brian (9 October 2006). "Just Ask! Brian "Humanistic" Jones about Deism". ReligiousFreaks.com. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  20. ^ Coon, Carl (16 July 2000). "Humanism vs. Atheism". Progressive Humanism. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  21. ^ Große, Gottfried; Plinius Secundus, Gaius (1787). Naturgeschichte: Mit Erläuternden Anmerkungen (in German). p. 165. ISBN 978-1175254436. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  22. ^ Broad, C. D. (1953). Religion, Philosophy and Psychical Research: Selected Essays. New York, New York: Harcourt, Brace. pp. 159–174. ASIN B0000CIFVR. LCCN 53005653.
  23. ^ Bowman, Jr., Robert M. (1997). "Apologetics from Genesis to Revelation" (Essay). Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  24. ^ deVerum, Alumno (12 March 2012). "Scientific Deism Explained". Institute of Noetic Sciences. Archived from the original on 22 October 2013. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  25. ^ Clendenen, Chuck. "Deism in Practice". Spiritual But Not Religious. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  26. ^ "Spiritual-Deism". Yahoo! Groups. Retrieved 29 August 2014.
  27. ^ Satguru Sivaya, Subramuniyaswami. "Dancing with Shiva". Himalayan Academy. Retrieved 17 June 2011.
  28. ^ "Sri Vishnu Sahasaranama - Transliteration and Translation of Chanting". Swami-krishnananda.org. Retrieved 16 April 2018.
  29. ^ Gupta, Ravi M. (2007). Caitanya Vaisnava Vedanta of Jiva Gosvami. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-40548-3.
  30. ^ Gupta, Ravi M. (2004). Caitanya Vaisnava Vedanta: Acintyabhedabheda in Jiva Gosvami's Catursutri tika. University Of Oxford.
  31. ^ Delmonico, N. (2004). "The History Of Indic Monotheism And Modern Chaitanya Vaishnavism". The Hare Krishna Movement: the Postcharismatic Fate of a Religious Transplant. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-12256-6. Retrieved 12 April 2008.
  32. ^ Elkman, S.M.; Gosvami, J. (1986). Jiva Gosvamin's Tattvasandarbha: A Study on the Philosophical and Sectarian Development of the Gaudiya Vaishnava Movement. Motilal Banarsidass Pub.
  33. ^ a b c Jain 2014, p. 3.
  34. ^ Jain 2013, p. 181.

References

External links