Question: Imaginary Forms of God
If it is wrong to portray God as an old man, why would it be justifiable to picture Him as a boy? Surely these are only anthropomorphic images which only serve to appease our need for 'seeing is believing' and further our worship of youth. Was youth not once described as being 'wasted on the young'?
Answer: God's Form is Not Imaginary
Thank you very much for revealing your mind to me regarding the "God as an old man"-"God as an eternal youth" controversy.
Actually in this connection, there is no controversy. The form of God is not an anthropomorphic concoction. In other words, it is not that we concoct a form of God according to our imagination. The actual reality is just the opposite. It is theomorphic. In other words we humans have gotten a form fashioned after the original form, the form of God. Since God has two arms, two legs, etc, we also have forms with two arms, two legs, etc. Krishna is not depicted as a youth because we are worshipping youth. He is presented in this way because this is His actual form. He is factually an eternal youth who never ages past sixteen to twenty years. It is confirmed both in the Bible and in the Vedic wisdom that we have gotten forms after the form of God. It is not that we have imagined Him to have a form like ours.