What is your God really really like ?

[isaone]

Debating God is always frustrating. To me a large part of that reason is that (it seems ) no two people actually admit to having the same definition of God. In particular whenever I attempt to make some point concerning someones belief in God I am constantly being told that the attributes I have shown to be untrue or inconsistent are not really what the other person believes.

To those of you who do believe in a god, What exactly are it's attributes :

1. Omniscient
2. Omnibenelevolent
3. Omnipotent
4. Intervenses in everthing that happens
5. Intervnes novert at all in the physical universere
6. Used to intervene but never does anymore
7. {and so forth}

Please make specific statements if at all possible . If you can annotate your specific belief with reasons. Note that stating that you believe that God is benelevolent cannot be supported by the fact that you had a mystical experience where you felt one with the oresence of God and through it your life was changed for the better. I am honestly happy that your life improved but the two do not relate. Statements such as

• God is love
• God is in everyone and everything
• God is everything that is good about us
• God s the universe striving to know itself
• {and so forth}

are sweet sentiments but completely pointless. In each you are simply redefining the term God so that it can now be used for something that we all know to exist. If 'God is love" is the best definition you have, than please just admit you are an Atheist and use the term "Love" whenever you want to talk about that subject. Doing this would eliminate some really bad miscommunication.

[thrashee]

Quote by: isaone are sweet sentiments but completely pointless. In each you are simply redefining the term God so that it can now be used for something that we all know to exist. If 'God is love" is the best definition you have, than please just admit you are an Atheist and use the term "Love" whenever you want to talk about that subject. Doing this would eliminate some really bad miscommunication.

In other words, you want us to define God, but you want to restrict how we define God so that you can box us into logical inconsistencies.

The restrictions themselves are inherently ridiculous, because IF there is a God, it most likely would (by reasoning alone) encompass all of the things you listed.

I understand that essentially you're stating that such definitions aren't really constructing any more of a definition for God beyond what already exists, but there are theists (myself included) that actually think these qualities are God. It doesn't make it any less of a definition, just one that's harder to box in :)

[Rogue Cardinal]

Well I think that God is terribly misrepresented by man if there is one. If one studies up on Hebrew.....El Shadai= The God that is SUFFICIENT. It's only due to the Hellenization of the hebrew writings that we get notions of God being omnipotent and perfect and all that jazz.

I would wager that there isn't a Christian on the planet that truly knows what there God is. I'd say that IF there is one.....it would no doubt be a powerful one. But that doesn't mean it's a perfect god at all. According to the Jews.....of all the gods.....he's just that one that is just good enough. He has faults like all of us. That's why he is human like all of us in that he gets pissed and bent once in awhile.

Of course beyond that.....the word is so jacked up and lost to inequity that there is no way to really know how much if any of it is true.

[isaone]

In other words, you want us to define God, but you want to restrict how we define God so that you can box us into logical inconsistencies.

No I am not. What I want is to have an exchange of information that allows us to understand one another more than when we started. By definition stating that one noun 'is' another simply creates a synonym and adds no information.

You could of course state that God is:

• Loving (not love)
• Joyful (not joy)
• Happy (not happiness)
• Angry (not anger)

Perhaps you could argue that my ability to experience love requires the existence of something external to my physical being. If that thing were not present then I could not love my daughter. In that case you could hold that God is that thing. Just as electricity requires electrons to convey it perhaps there are lovtrons ? This is actually a redefinition of the term love but if this is your position let me know and we can discuss.

[thrashee]

Quote by: isaone This is actually a redefinition of the term love but if this is your position let me know and we can discuss.

A good point then.

I do actually believe this, as I think love is probably the closest thing to "the energy of God" as we can describe.

[Gregory]

-Don't know



Good enough?

[Rainbow]

Quote by: isaone What is your God really really like ?

A form of Intellectual Entity, Energy, etc., not neccesarily associated and/or affiliated with biblical description.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Rainbow A form of Intellectual Entity, Energy, etc., not neccesarily associated and/or affiliated with biblical description.

Sounds good ^

Although I bet someone's gonna call you on "intellectual" not being an appropriate word

[loser]

1) God is an extraterrestrial

2) God is a sentient being

3) God is still learning so He is NOT all-knowing

4) God has limits so He is NOT all-powerful

5) God is ENERGY (but still in conjunction with attribute 2)

6) God expends energy when He creates matter

7) God gains energy when matter is destroyed

8) God has an agenda which includes mankind

9) God is patient, deliberate, and flexible

10) God is timeless, His creation is not

[isaone]

Thanks for the replies.

Thrashee what does it mean to say God is Love? If there were no God would we no longer be able to love anyone ? Are those who do not know of God's existence or those who deny it (such as myself) less able to love than others ? Love is a emotion and not something that thinks and takes actions and has intentions. If God is equivalent to Love then how can God do any of the above ?

we have some agreement that God is Energy. This is one of my favorite (LOL) arguments I have with New Agers (the second is 'vibration'). The term energy simply means "The ability to do work" . In that sense everything is energy so to state that God is energy really adds no meaning beypond stating that "That tree is energy" . Of course since God and the tree are energy then "God is that tree" ? If of course you mean that God is all of the energy in all forms in the entire universe then that is a sort of a Pantheist/Deist approach which results in a non acting/personal God . Is that your position ?

To all of y'all. You seem to have specific opinioins on this which is great. Thanks to loser in particular for the specific things he states. My real question however is how do you know these things? How do you know that God is Love and not Hate (or is God both ?), How do you know that god is patient ?

[stardust]

I don't know what God "really really" is like. We can understand god only by his attributes, through taking a holy book as a source. You would probably say that why believe in something you don't understand. But when it comes to god, faith is more inviolable than reason itself. God is immortal, infinite and eternal. We as human beings are finite and so is our mindset, therefore we naturally cannot comprehend something that is beyond our limited knowledge.
- God is enegy, hm, no. Maybe if you are a pantheist. If you are an athesit, then your knowledge of god is a priori, that is if you always have been an atheist. A theist because of his faith, has a posteriori knowledge of god, that's with experience, which perhaps to a theist is reasonable enough.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: HelioPrime Sounds good ^ Although I bet someone's gonna call you on "intellectual" not being an appropriate word

How am I to know whether Homo Sapiens' logic is the correct one ? :-)

[NoonBlueApples]

We cannot define God for God defines us. The contents of a box do not define the box, nor does a box define it's contents. God exists on the quantum level as well as the multi-universal level. We don't even fully understand the nature or our universe or quantum mechanics. How can we define something we barely scratch the surface of. The fact that we can know anything at all shows us there is a path to enlightenment. Follow the path, that is all we can do.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: isaone we have some agreement that God is Energy. This is one of my favorite (LOL) arguments I have with New Agers (the second is 'vibration'). The term energy simply means "The ability to do work" . In that sense everything is energy so to state that God is energy really adds no meaning beyond stating that "That tree is energy" . Of course since God and the tree are energy then "God is that tree" ? If of course you mean that God is all of the energy in all forms in the entire universe then that is a sort of a Pantheist/Deist approach which results in a non acting/personal God . Is that your position ?

I do not know whether God acts directly and/or indirectly, since we have no idea what happens to atoms (within the Universe we are part of). We have no clue whether atoms store any information, and if they do (store informations on configurations they interact with/in) then we have no data on that stored information's characteristics and/or attributes at all.
Otherwise, it would give us some answers to eventual existence of parallel worlds, at least.

I am a little scheptical that God can interact with all the elements at the same time, within the Universe we live-in. It would point that God is the Universe itself (!) If "yes", then what is the sense of Homo Sapiens' presence ?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Rainbow How am I to know whether Homo Sapiens' logic is the correct one ? :-)

NONSENSE!!!

Humans created logic and reason. Stop living in the stone age and deny God already. You have no proof so you HAVE to deny the existence. Otherwise your illogical. Which is bad. You have to accept that as bad. And be sure to tell your friends its bad too.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: HelioPrime NONSENSE!!! Humans created logic and reason. Stop living in the stone age and deny God already. You have no proof so you HAVE to deny the existence. Otherwise your illogical. Which is bad. You have to accept that as bad. And be sure to tell your friends its bad too.

How do you know Homo Sapiens developed logic ? Yet, we have no clue on DNA except for some blunt numbers.
Are you that Extra-Terrestrial guy ?

Are you suggesting that if an occurencce is not detectable, then that occurrence does not exist ??? :-)

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Rainbow How do you know Homo Sapiens developed logic ? Yet, we have no clue on DNA except for some blunt numbers. Are you that Extra-Terrestrial guy ? Are you suggesting that if an occurencce is not detectable, then that occurrence does not exist ??? :-)

Well DUUUUHHHHHH!!!!

Please drop the act and stop being so irrational!

If we can't detect it then we can't consider it a possibility. Aliens are different if you'll please read below.

This isn't hard. When a car breaks down I call a mechanic. I don't pray to God. See? God doesn't fix cars. So there is no reason to suppose he created life or does anything special. Stop being so coy and innocent and face up to the fact your God just plain doesn't exist. Either he shows himself or we must assume he doesn't exist. That simple. I'm right here btw so please admit the fact already. K tnx bye!

Oh and btw. According to probabilities ET's do exist because life must exist on other planets. K tnx bye!

[thrashee]

Quote by: isaone Thanks for the replies. Thrashee what does it mean to say God is Love? If there were no God would we no longer be able to love anyone ? Are those who do not know of God's existence or those who deny it (such as myself) less able to love than others ? Love is a emotion and not something that thinks and takes actions and has intentions. If God is equivalent to Love then how can God do any of the above ?

I think love surpasses simply an emotion. I think it's the energy of creation itself (the best sort of definition I could use). In other words, I think love is the essence of that energy. So no, whether you believe in God or not would have nothing to do with your capacity to love. I don't think God is synonymous to love, but one is certainly encompassed in the other.

If of course you mean that God is all of the energy in all forms in the entire universe then that is a sort of a Pantheist/Deist approach which results in a non acting/personal God . Is that your position ?

I am essentially a pantheist, yes. I don't believe that therefore means God cannot be personal, however. I believe we are carry God within us, meaning we are all expressions of God, that essentially we are one and the same. I believe God is experiencing itself through us. So to me, it's very personal.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: HelioPrime Well DUUUUHHHHHH!!!! Please drop the act and stop being so irrational! If we can't detect it then we can't consider it a possibility. Aliens are different if you'll please read below. This isn't hard. When a car breaks down I call a mechanic. I don't pray to God. See? God doesn't fix cars. So there is no reason to suppose he created life or does anything special. Stop being so coy and innocent and face up to the fact your God just plain doesn't exist. Either he shows himself or we must assume he doesn't exist. That simple. I'm right here btw so please admit the fact already. K tnx bye! Oh and btw. According to probabilities ET's do exist because life must exist on other planets. K tnx bye!

Maybe God does not fix cars, but I am a result of God's atoms creation, especially since the BigBang was not in position to accumulate all the needed elements and/or matter, itself.

It is good enough I have some (functional , I suppose) grey-cells. Therefore, I do not need to call for God to help me with fixing my car. I can manage it myself :-)

P.S.
I was laughing since you seemed to suggest, we know everything about Homo Sapiens' brain. Therefore, only one who does not belong to Homo Sapiens could have stated that. In other words : E.T. :-)))

Besides, I agree on ET existence.