the definition of god

[Nemiroff]

The recent trend among the god debates here have been that any arguments about god have been countered by the statement that we elevated him to a diety status based on what people personified god as. Well then for the sake of fair debate, what is the definition of god. No matter how general a definition, just like the only things we know about the judeo Christian god are the all powerful, all knowing, all good attributes given to him, what are the points about god that are common amongst sll debators on this site.

I know that's asking for a heck of a lot, but if not a single consistent definition is given for god then no debate will be possible, and some of us will be stuck coming up with a different answer for everyone, not very fair!

[ChinUp]

God is a word we fall back on when we cannot define what we experience, any attempt to define the word God is an attempt to replace God with human vanity ie. presume to be the authority on all that is beyond definition or explanation.

Sadly people cannot stand vacuums, so they fill them with lies. People would rather adopt a lie, than face an inconvenient truth. This where the whole creation mythos flows from fear of mysterious vacuums, which is quite silly, because reality is primarily composed of said mysterious vacuums. It has been said that if you put all our knowledge on a 12 hour clock of all data available it would barely reach the fifth second in the first hour.

Certainty is in real world terms a lie.

[nerdvincent]

I'm Pantheist . God is a personification of the universe, it's Spinoza's God. Science is here to explain God, not reject him, that's why I love it. It doesn't need supernatural crap to astonish me, just physics laws, and if there is nothing before God well why can't we call it universe? Is he even councious? No, he got no brain.
10 more minutes and I'd have created this thread.
*Sorry for people who quoted me, I modified my post.

[ChinUp]

Quote by: nerdvincent I'm for a pantheist definition of God, Spinoza's God. It's a non-theistic definition of God. What I love, as a scientist, is that it don't reject science and don't bother with supernatural. Science explains God.Pantheism 10 more minutes and I'd have created this thread.

Yes a Spinozan replacement for the current abomination in the dictonary would be a great improvement, I have lost track of the amount of theists who dictate to me what God is with a dictonary. But sadly scripture provides the majority of publications referring to the word God, so a scriptural definition for the word God is found in dictionaries.

Its absurd to think people take the word of those who are most arrogant & prolific about the word God as the Gospel truth

Gospel truth ROFL what an oxymoron.

[ZNFYRH]

I'm also something of a Pantheist / Agnostic / Taoist.

I don't believe any of the more "modern" gods are the right one. I am much more inclined to believe in gods as forces of nature, the Pantheonic Gods of Greece, Rome, Norway, Egypt, etc.

I think that it is backwards to insist that "God" must always mean "created the universe." I think that's the easiest way to change context to make a debate "winnable."

In my lifetime, in my study of Theology, I have found that "God" more accurately should be defined as a being with abilities beyond the understanding of science and nature... literally "supernatural."

Ironically, Superman is not a God. His abilities are "explained," so to speak.

I also believe, along that same line, that the abilities of God make more sense when perceived correctly.

I think of the Q from Star Trek TNG. They weren't Gods. Their abilities were not supernatural... they could explain how they did what they did.

Q (John Delancey), in one episode, talked about moving an entire moon. They asked him how to do that, and he admitted that he makes a local change to the gravitational constant of the universe, thus changing the mass of the moon to something he can move.

Science fiction, yes, but the idea is the same. That's why I think one of the most interesting sayings is:

"The Lord works in mysterious ways."

I think "God" is better defined with the more general "abilities beyond understanding" and not "created the universe."

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: ZNFYRH I think "God" is better defined with the more general "abilities beyond understanding" and not "created the universe."

Where is the limit of our understanding? If we understand him will he stop being God? If fish don't understand us, are we Gods? Are every women godess to men?
My way of worshiping God (universe in my case) is by understanding it, so ,agreeing to your definition, to make him stop being god.
Nature is my Bible.

[ZNFYRH]

Quote by: nerdvincent Where is the limit of our understanding?

I see a difference between understanding how God(s) does it and actually being able to do it ourselves.

Like the Q, knowing how they move a moon doesn't mean we can do it.

I think it's possible to understand God(s) but still revere them for their ability.

[ChinUp]

I think when you treat the word God like a noun, a thing. Use engendering, he .. you limit the potential of the word God, you make the word God no differnt than the word deity.

I like the word God because it is deep, it needs no introduction or explanation to have quality. One can just say God & listen to its resonance. Like listening to a Nepalese prayer bowl.

[nerdvincent]

So true. In fact I ain't really pantheist, I'm ignostic, but I believe the right definiton of God to be pantheism.

[nerdvincent]

But in any case, I'm non-theist, exept when I have to worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Ramen

[ChinUp]

Thats using your noodle :-)

The more I think about it the more I think defining the word God is like guessing what comes after death or guessing time & space have an origin. NO need, show some freeking self control I say. let the butterfly fly, no need to kill it & pin it to a board to feel the the clever one .

but then I do love a good mystery. like watching a gull fly, where did you come from where are you going. I can hang out with that for hours fill up with sheer joy @ existence. Nothing makes me feel more alive than being baffled .

"A first sign of the beginning of understanding is the wish to die." -Franz Kafka | 1883 – 1924

[Nemiroff]

i was trying to see if there is a common idea about him, seeing as there isn't, that means that just about any thread referring to god in some way or other is now pointless because its impossible to argue about something when everyone has a different definition of what that something is.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: ChinUp Thats using your noodle :-) The more I think about it the more I think defining the word God is like guessing what comes after death or guessing time & space have an origin.

Of coure it is, but let's debate. The better we can do is making hypothesis, and thus feeding our soul (no matter your definition of soul), and that's a lot.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: Nemiroff i was trying to see if there is a common idea about him, seeing as there isn't, that means that just about any thread referring to god in some way or other is now pointless because its impossible to argue about something when everyone has a different definition of what that something is.

Exactly. Plus, debating about it is fun, as long as it don't become a science vs bible thread.
But now we would need some people debating for another definition of God.

[ChinUp]

nerdvincent .. how about simple awe ? When you hear it said is that not what it sounds like is being said ?

[freedom13]

Quote by: Nemiroff The recent trend among the god debates here have been that any arguments about god have been countered by the statement that we elevated him to a diety status based on what people personified god as. Well then for the sake of fair debate, what is the definition of god. No matter how general a definition, just like the only things we know about the judeo Christian god are the all powerful, all knowing, all good attributes given to him, what are the points about god that are common amongst sll debators on this site. I know that's asking for a heck of a lot, but if not a single consistent definition is given for god then no debate will be possible, and some of us will be stuck coming up with a different answer for everyone, not very fair!

Mark 12:27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

God live in the person sound fairly enough.

[ChinUp]

Quote by: freedom13 God live in the person sound fairly enough.

can you simplify that ?

[freedom13]

Quote by: ChinUp can you simplify that ?

What do you see when you look in a mirror? What happen to a person when he or she stops breathing? Is that simple enough for you?

Mark 12:27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

John 14: 9-11 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

[JLrep]

John 4:8
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Intellectual theology is more likely to say that God cannot be wholly defined (just as He cannot be wholly imagined or comprehended) by the likes of us.

[nerdvincent]

Quote by: freedom13 What do you see when you look in a mirror? What happen to a person when he or she stops breathing? Is that simple enough for you? Mark 12:27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. John 14: 9-11 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Nothing personal really, but could you do a logical reasoning instead of spamming bible quotes endlessly? You can try to explain your reasoning with quotes, but all I see here is quotes with nothing to explain. I can read Bible of my own.