Define God

elliebean · January 01, 2011, 09:28:34 PM

Of these gods, how many are supposed to have created a universe, or be omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, benevolent, even supernatural, or are said to have any of the other attributes typically posited as criteria for godhood? What supposed attributes do all of these have in common?

For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?

Edited for spelling

LegendarySandwich · January 01, 2011, 09:30:13 PM

I don't know. Probably it's just because I've always imagined God as the creator of the universe. To think of him as anything else seems weird.

Yes, you can tell I was raised Christian.

EDIT:

Quote from: "ellibean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?

Not necessarily.

Stevil · January 01, 2011, 09:31:56 PM

Quote from: "elliebean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?

Either that or some of these gods need to be redefined/relabelled as something other than a god.

LegendarySandwich · January 01, 2011, 09:34:07 PM

Quote from: "Stevil"
Quote from: "elliebean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?
Either that or some of these gods need to be redefined/relabelled as something other than a god.

Perhaps "Sub-Gods". Or something.

elliebean · January 01, 2011, 09:39:33 PM

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"
Quote from: "ellibean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?
Not necessarily.

Why not?

LegendarySandwich · January 01, 2011, 09:40:50 PM

Quote from: "elliebean"
Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"
Quote from: "ellibean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?
Not necessarily.
Why not?

You could say that those gods weren't really gods.

elliebean · January 01, 2011, 10:16:55 PM

Or you could say that wasn't a real definition.

Wilson · January 01, 2011, 10:18:05 PM

My definition of God is exactly the same as the Sandwich man's. It seems to be the minimum God could be and still be considered God by anyone. And by that definition, I don't think anyone can ever prove that God doesn't exist. (Or that he does.) In fact, that's the Deist God.

But of course a God which has only those characteristics has no place in our lives. Makes absolutely no difference whether we believe in Him or not. Add another characteristic - benevolent, interventionist, eternal life - so that it might be significant to believe in Him .. and He becomes much, much easier to disprove.

elliebean · January 01, 2011, 10:22:29 PM

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"Not necessarily
Quote from: "elliebean"Why not?
QuoteYou could say that those gods weren't really gods.

And actually, my point is that none of them are "really" gods.

LegendarySandwich · January 01, 2011, 10:33:47 PM

Quote from: "Wilson"My definition of God is exactly the same as the Sandwich man's. It seems to be the minimum God could be and still be considered God by anyone. And by that definition, I don't think anyone can ever prove that God doesn't exist. (Or that he does.) In fact, that's the Deist God.

But of course a God which has only those characteristics has no place in our lives. Makes absolutely no difference whether we believe in Him or not. Add another characteristic - benevolent, interventionist, eternal life - so that it might be significant to believe in Him .. and He becomes much, much easier to disprove.

Yep.

Quote from: "elliebean"Or you could say that wasn't a real definition.

Yep. This just further proves the point that it's all opinion.

The Magic Pudding · January 01, 2011, 11:12:09 PM

A human creation to explain the inexplicable by personification of phenomena.
The inexplicable doesn't necessarily remain so, therefore last millennia's gods can seem ludicrous.

Stevil · January 01, 2011, 11:20:30 PM

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"A human creation to explain the inexplicable by personification of phenomena.
The inexplicable doesn't necessarily remain so, therefore last millennia's gods can seem ludicrous.

Yes, wanting to know the answers to everything without having to admit that we just don't know.

Problem How come we exist?
Theory 1In the begining there was nothing. Then the universe was created.
Problem with Theory 1 But everything seems so complicated and appears to be designed.
Theory 1-1 The universe was created by an intelligent designer.

Are there any other problems that Theory 1 and Theory 1-1 don't solve but may need expansion of the idea of an intelligent designer to solve?

The Magic Pudding · January 01, 2011, 11:41:25 PM

Quote from: "Stevil"Yes, wanting to know the answers to everything without having to admit that we just don't know.

Problem How come we exist?
Theory 1In the begining there was nothing. Then the universe was created.
Problem with Theory 1 But everything seems so complicated and appears to be designed.
Theory 1-1 The universe was created by an intelligent designer.

Are there any other problems that Theory 1 and Theory 1-1 don't solve but may need expansion of the idea of an intelligent designer to solve?

You might think the designer is a benevolent father.
Some bad guy is going to be needed to explain bad stuff.
Or you could blame your self, it that's your thing.
Death is a problem, something will have to done about that.

Stevil · January 02, 2011, 12:29:24 AM

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"
Quote from: "Stevil"Yes, wanting to know the answers to everything without having to admit that we just don't know.

Problem How come we exist?
Theory 1In the begining there was nothing. Then the universe was created.
Problem with Theory 1 But everything seems so complicated and appears to be designed.
Theory 1-1 The universe was created by an intelligent designer.

Are there any other problems that Theory 1 and Theory 1-1 don't solve but may need expansion of the idea of an intelligent designer to solve?

You might think the designer is a benevolent father.
Some bad guy is going to be needed to explain bad stuff.
Or you could blame your self, it that's your thing.
Death is a problem, something will have to done about that.

People need incentive to belief this stuff
so, good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell

but then non believers think they are good people so have the basses cover

Well, trump that with,
No matter what, if you don't believe, then you go to hell.

Inevitable Droid · January 02, 2011, 02:16:39 AM

Quote from: "elliebean"For a definition of "god" to make sense as a definition, doesn't it have to apply to all of them?

Then the definition would be, "that which is worshipped."

So far this thread has impressed upon me a key differentiator among respondents, as some emphasize creation; others, dominion; others, worship; and others, explanatory utility.

The last of the four is the one I currently emphasize in my own thinking, and so I name energy my God, pointless to worship. Energy ultimately explains everything. It also needs no creation if it was always here, no governance since its attributes are eternally constant, and no worship since it presumably is oblivious to that. We could start a church of energy and name physicists its de facto clergy, except there would be no point. Interestingly, New Age spirituality speaks endlessly of energy, only in forms our physicists are unable to detect.

News:

Define God