What Is God?

Can you describe your god? To me it seems that everyone has their own definition of what their god is. Basically there are several billion current definitions of what god is. Often enough people say that their god is love. I don’t think that works out to well.

There are so many definitions and uses of the word that it seems a bad way to describe anything. You can say we make god. That was the best god session I’ve had in a while. I god chocolate ice cream. I god you, do you god me? Building model airplanes is his one true god. She was my high school god. Who is the god interest in this movie? I god it when a plan comes together.

The other way around is a bit odd too: Oh my love! Love is the creator of the universe. Love hates fags.

I know there are more than atheists who read here, what is  your definition of god?

Advertisements
  1. Am still waiting for a definition to come in so I can change some of my posts where I ask that question.
    Should you then get one that seems plausible, let me know

    • Oh, if I get one, I’m going to do several posts… lol

  2. I personally find it funny when people describe God as love, to me it comes off as saying, ‘God is a oxytocin hormone that produces a positive emotion.’

    • Exactly! Thanks for commenting

    • Hahaha! 🙂

      • Perspective Collector
      • October 10th, 2013

      That is funny, totally know what you mean!

    • preacherontheweb
    • October 9th, 2013

    Interesting way of looking at a time old debate.

    My God is everything to me
    He is my creator, He is my love and is also love.
    He is my master and the master of all that I can see or touch.

    • To you… so there are still billions of definitions of god.
      One might question why the god who is love and master of everything permits so much violence, pain, and suffering. Do you happen to know?

    • to me this sounds like…… “God is my metaphycial subconscious.”

      • Well, those voices you hear in your head are from your subconsciousness…. must be where god is hanging out

  3. I believe theists are better off without a good definition. Soon as they produce one, we will blow holes in it. Yes, they are much better off keeping their definition of god a wispy, unknowable, unconceivable entity to man. Otherwise, we can zoom in and show them why they are wrong. Defining god would deny them their so loved land of endless possibilities.

    • I agree completely with this thought. Just the same, I don’t think it should be permitted that people who vote and deprive others of their right to liberty and equality should be allowed to blame it all on something that they can’t even describe in a universal way.

    • Perspective Collector
    • October 10th, 2013

    Please don’t hate me for this different tact I’m going to take.
    If I was to define a specific person, it’s hard to know where to begin. Because a person is so many things. Do I start with their biology? The atoms they are made of? Do I start with talking about the brain and mind? Do I talk about the species?
    Then do I move on and talk about how they relate to all other species to show what a person is?
    Then do I move on from the physical aspect of a person to the mental aspect?
    And after that do I talk about the person’s name?
    And then do I talk about the person’s physical features? Well they have green eyes, brown hair, etc.
    And then do I talk about the clothing they wear? Do I talk about the fashions they’re into? Do I then talk about their likes and dislikes. Their personality? The childhood? Their family? Their life experiences that made them who they are today?
    Do I talk about the type of friends they have? What kind of ice-cream they like?
    Do I talk about them in action? Like they do this type of work and they do this kind of hobby?
    Do I talk about them in terms of how they relate to me: they are a friend, brother, father, uncle, etc. They hug me when I cry, they get angry at me when I crack my knuckles.
    I could go on and on just trying to tell you what this person is – as a person, to me, to the world, to individual people, just as they are themselves, biologically, etc. I could tell you who they are with stories – well they’re bigger than a cat, smaller than an elephant. They have an even temperament because when I crashed their car they didn’t get angry.
    Also, how I describe this person might be completely different to how another person describes them. The person will smash a door: one person will see an angry man because someone did something nasty to him and he’s venting his anger, one will see a man simply trying to knock down a door to get in, one will see a man pretending to knock down a door because someone bet them money to do it.
    Depending on who sees the person and what context the person encounters the man, they will describe him differently. Not a single one person will know everything about this man unless they were with him every second of his life and have access to every one of his thoughts. But they still know him and can describe him
    So to define God, the specific God of the bible as opposed to people, nature, other gods/ideas, people can do it a multitude of ways but it’s possible that it’s still the same God. Some people may describe God in the metaphysical sense. Some will describe him in the experiential sense. Some will provide context and story, others will provide a blanket statement. Some will look to what God is to describe him, some will look to what God does to describe him, etc. People can experience the same God in different ways and therefore describe him in different ways too. If you’ve never lost a loved one, you may never have experienced God as comforter, but you may have experienced him as teacher. And it will be different for the next person, etc.
    Aside from all the different methods people may take to describing God, and the different experiences we have in life, there are of course, false views of God. And it’s the task of the person to find out if it’s correct or not. But even if everyone had the correct view of God, there will still be as many description of him as there are people.
    Just as every person will describe one man differently. Oh, he’s tall. He’s kind. He’s a human being. He’s bigger than a cat. He’s got skin. He likes reading. He’s a mechanic. He’s my friend. He’s my dad. He’s my headache. All of these are different descriptions of the one man. But every one of them is true. And yet none of them encompass the whole man.
    And when people are asked to define God, they have an enormous task. So they resort to one word, or one sentence. And you’re always going to get different words and sentences, and stories and contexts, etc. But it is possible to be all the same God.
    Again, sorry for the long post.

    • ==People can experience the same God in different ways and therefore describe him in different ways too … And it will be different for the next person, etc.==
      This begs the question: how can you know you are talking about the same god? How can you know it _IS_ god?

      If you cannot describe god, it is problematic. The bible tells us about his traits and desires and commands.
      People regularly claim to have a personal relationship with their god.
      Tell me one personal relationship that you’ve had with a human but could not describe the person.

      An infinite and unchanging god does not have a variable description. He is not one thing today and another thing tomorrow. The entirety of what you have to believe in this god has not changed for many moons. There is no reason to think a common description is not possible unless there is no definition of what your god is. If there is no definition, how do you even know there is a god or that what you worship is a god?

      Try to understand that if you cannot describe your god, how can anyone be expected to understand your beliefs except through sheer ignorance?

      That is not meant as derogatory or insulting.

        • Perspective Collector
        • October 10th, 2013

        No, you can describe God. Just one person will say love, another will say comforter, another will say trinity, another will say creator, another will say some long theological explanation, another will say some explanation based on experience, another will say some action God does, another will say etc. etc.
        To me, that’s describing God. Just as people describe people by saying, he’s short, another will say he’s taller than me, another will say he’s kind, another will say he’s a mechanic, another will say he’s tough, another will say he has two eyes, etc.

        They are all descriptions. Yet they aren’t the whole person. But people can still describe people. You just don’t get the whole picture. People CAN describe God in the exact same way.

        • ==People CAN describe God in the exact same way.==

          Why don’t they? All the monotheistic religions believe in the god of Abraham… yet all of them think god is different in very drastic ways.

          When there is no common understanding, how can you know that you are even talking about the same god?

          To me, all these different interpretations of what god is looks exactly like there is no god and people are just describing their subconscious self in how it appears to them.

            • Perspective Collector
            • October 10th, 2013

            I’m not qualified in all monotheistic religions so can’t really comment on that, but you’ll hate my answer for how can we know – the bible. I may as well have not said it, right. Often, we can even say the right thing about God, but still be grossly misled if we don’t hold it in tension with another right thing about God.
            E.g. One person will say God is transcendent so big over everything – it’s true. Yet another person will so God is imminent and so close to them in an intimate way, chatting to each other – it’s true. Here are two seemingly incompatible truths and people will describe God in one or the other (I wouldn’t because it’s misleading – I’d describe both aspects), but there’s no actual lie in their description. Just that someone who doesn’t know God, will take that one description and hold it against the other and say, Look the Christians are totally screwing it up for themselves. So yeah, it’s understandable.
            Sorry I went off topic again, just thinking out loud.

            • I don’t hold one against the other and say they are inconsistent so god does not exist… I ask how can you know it is god if hardly anyone experiences the same thing. How do you know it is not the satan?

                • Perspective Collector
                • October 10th, 2013

                Well, I’d say in my circle at least, we pretty much all experience the same thing. Love, conviction, a firm hand, teaching, a father, a trinity, etc. etc.
                If it’s Satan we know things about him too- he condemns, makes people feel unworthy, makes people feel unloved, etc. That’s what the bible says. Even Christians struggle at times. Many a Christians think God is condemning them when God only convicts the believer.
                I know you’ll disagree.

                • Ahhh, but how do you know that is how the satan acts? It is not that I disagree, I want to know HOW you know these things you think you know.

                    • Perspective Collector
                    • October 10th, 2013

                    I did just say, the bible right?
                    Or do you mean more practically, in experience?
                    Like the listening to the spirit question you had?

                    • I mean all of it. I am not convinced that there is any gods. It all seems false and every one that claims there is a god describes their god differently than everyone else that claims the same god. It is so inconsistent as to look exactly like make-believe

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Oh yeah, you don’t believe in any gods. Sure! And can see where you’re coming from, reasonable objection that Christians should wrestle with. The thing is, the ones who do answer it will most likely have answers you will never agree with. Because we value different data/factors but see all the same factors yet come to different conclusion because of those different values.
                      Some value honesty over keeping a promise, others don’t. Some value science, others don’t. But still whatever the factor, we will still see purple/blue.

                    • that was a flowery agree to disagree thing. Do you remember my explanation of thought and consciousness?

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      How could I forget!

                    • My theory of mind explains this… and there is no god necessary

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      And you would know that I don’t agree with your theory of mind, right! Though I love the theory and the thought process behind it- so interesting. And you point out so many good points. And I just love talking about
                      dreams.

                    • Well, where do you want the explanation of low self esteem while you have high value of self?

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Here’s fine.
                      Also, I think people would say that your god is mind? Does that sit well at all? Not that it’s a god, just in the sense that that’s what you believe and put your faith in? Not the Christian type of faith, but you’ll lay your life on the theory of mind?
                      Ignore me if this was way off.

                    • Well, that would be so for people that believe that everyone has a god. They’re wrong, but believe it anyway as part of the justification in their rules for what they believe

                    • In my theory of mind, we run a simulator in our brains. it is informed by our senses so it is like the real world but a few hundred millisenconds behind. In this worls we have rules for how things behave, how other people behave and so forth.

                      To explain how a person can be both low in self esteem and high in self evaluation we need only look at how the rules work. The rules we use to judge ourselves are different than the rules we use in judging how people judge us. Usually we value ourselves above what others see us as. We are wont to think they are wrong before we admit we are.

                      If we value ourselves in a local simulation… judging the rules of local (excluding rules for external persons) we see ourselves as good. When we include our rules for external agencies, we devalue ourselves because if we feel they are more likely to be right, then our own valuation (rule set, aspect values) of ourselves is sbusumed by external valuations. When we do not know how to change the external valuation and do not want the internal valuation to change it causes strife in the rules. So we keep them separate. Never do what mixes both rules sets. In this way we can have one rule set that allows us to think we are good and another rule set that allows us to believe we are less than.. and fear all input on the matter.

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Yep, cool, I can see how it fits with your model- my you do do a lot thinking don’t you! So it would work the other too, right. The person who sees themselves as better than everyone else all the time. That’s just a different external valuation.
                      In your theory, do opposing rule sets have the possibility of merging into one new set for both local and external? Or are they always separate?
                      You could apply your theory to any rule then couldn’t you? You’ve probably thought about many of them.
                      Do you analyze your own mind using your theory?
                      And does it make good impacts.
                      Sorry if this isn’t what you want to hear, but this could turn into a religion in itself. Everyone believing in the theory of mind and using it as a tool to improve life. Well people already do that I suppose (including Christians), just not with your specific theory.

                    • Yes, they can merge, but they are always two sets of rules…. because they apply to different aspects of the simulation model. I think about this all the time and have applied it to myself.. always. Yes, I analyze my own mind and how I think… it is what thinking people do without realizing it. Self awareness and thought are always good for us. It is not a religion if it is reality….

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Metacognition! Gotta love it!

                    • you say that and do not understand what I’m saying…

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Do’h, sorry. I just love metacognition – analyzing how we think, and think about thinking and use it as a tool in our lives. Ignore me, I can talk about metacognition all day. I’d have trouble talking about your theory of mind all day since it’s new to me. I’d probably do a disservice to you if I tried to explain to people.

                    • Meta cognition is thinking about thinking but you are not doing that…

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      Agree to disagree. I believe I study my thoughts and probe them. It’s how I know why I scream after a shock and not during it, when most people I know scream during it. Because I study what’s going on in my brain during the shock and analyze my thoughts during and after the shock and see how they differ. It’s how I know why I do many things I do because I’ve analyzed my thoughts about them, during them, after them, etc. When I hear that voice speaking thoughts, I analyze that voice at the same time. “Oh I’m thinking about that, why, how, etc.” When I think thoughts that I don’t speak in my head, I analyze those too. Why did I think that, why didn’t I speak those in my head, but I spoke the other ones. I listen to every thought (spoken or not) step outside of the thought and dissect it to understand them. If that isn’t metacgonition then we agree to disagree.

                    • You study your thoughts? Why do you fear rejection?

                    • http://gorgeouscompany.me/2013/10/11/be-notorious/

                      • Perspective Collector
                      • October 10th, 2013

                      I like it!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: