What is "God"?

[arensb]

Okay, let's try this another way. An atheist is, quite simply, someone who lacks belief in any gods. Yes, my icon says I'm an atheist, but perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about.

So what I'm asking for is a definition of "deity" that's specific enough for me to tell whether I believe in any deities or not.

For instance, StTherese said "God IS Existence". Clearly, if I'm asking what a god is, then there must exist something doing the asking, and so, by that definition, God exists. But by this definition, God is an abstraction, and not a sentient or intelligent being. "Existence" doesn't--can't--care whether I believe in it, let alone write a book. So I doubt this is what most people mean they speak of a deity.

One can define "god" the way Einstein did, as the set of all physical laws. Again, by this definition, God exists (and there can be only one such god), but again, this is not a deity that ought to be worshiped; this is not a sapient being.

Many people throughout history thought of a god as a being much like a human, but much more powerful (though not omnipotent or omniscient, and definitely not omnibenevolent). See, for instance, the myths about Zeus turning into a bull to seduce Europa, or of Jacob wrestling with YHWH and winning, or of Thor drinking the ocean. I don't believe that any deity, by this definition, ever existed. I think you'll agree that this is sensible.

Furthermore, I'd like to see whether there's any consensus among Christians as to what the Christian God is. If one person says God is the sum total of everything that exists, and another says that God is a living, intelligent, male being who cares about whether people believe in him, then those appear to be descriptions of quite different things. I would expect someone to say that it's like the blind men describing an elephant, so I'll ask for some explanation as to how both descriptions can refer to the same entity.

Does this help any?

 

[DArceri]

I'd like to respond to your question but I need to understand what your belief of creation (or existence) is on. I think your in the 'big bang' camp, right? Or do you have another opinion on creation?

 

[Dasdream]

“If the Lord walked up to you and he asked you how you been?
Willl you tell him “I’ve been alright”
Or will you tell him “I don’t have time”?
The Lord will appear in many ways, but we may never see him at all
Because he’s the holy spirit and he can be in us all.
He can be in your neighbor, he can be in a stranger, he can be in your enemy and he can be in your best friend.
Don’t turn away from someone that asks you “how you been”?
Because that could be the Lord speaking to you through them.
So the next time someone asks you ”How was your day?”
Don’t you dare think about walking away.
Remember that God wants us to love our neighbor
And we should always do it as a favor.”

“Why Believe in God?”
The question should be why not believe in God? The proof of God’s existence is all around us. Throughout the years the world has tried to get credit for Gods creation. They create trees and say all the trees around us were created by man. How do you make a tree? Some would say “a seed possibly?” ok so where did the seed come from? Do not confuse what was created by man with what was created by God.



Man can build houses out of wood, but can’t make wood. Man can make boats but can’t make water. Man can create cars but can’t make the ground for it to move on. Man can make airplanes, but can’t make the sky for which it flies in. Man can make money, but money can’t buy happiness. Man can plant seeds but can’t make seeds. Man can create plenty of drama, but can’t seem to live at peace. Now, with proof of Gods creations all around us, how can we even doubt his existence? Clearly we would not be alive today if it was not for the air God has supplied us to breathe daily. Those that still refuse to believe that God does exist are just being ignorant at this point and really need to fight because that is satan deny the truth to enter into your soul. The proof is all around us. Man has tried to figure out where the Universe came from, meanwhile it’s already been explained in the Bible. If man cannot create the sky, day and night, then who did? Another thing I do a lot is that I go to the park or lake and just walk. I hear birds chirping, water splashing and breathing fresh air and such a calmness, there has to be a God, man could have not of created such calmness, there are a lot of things man can do, but one thing they can’t do is create peace. That is why there is so many wars going on. If man can create everything on earth, then go to the moon and create some stuff there, when their done have them call me so I can move there. Man cannot create a new planet, but God can and he has promised us a new earth, with peace and joy all around us!
The Bible says we were made in his image, but throughout the years I have noticed that man tries to change God into their own image, into what they want God to be instead of who he really is. I want you to do something, go outside and look up, tell me what you see. Sky most likely. Since day one, man has tried to figure out where the sky came from, where the sun came from and why is it so hot. The Bible clearly gives us the answer to all this, yes it doesn’t tell us why the sun is hot, but that is obvious, flowers and plants wouldn’t grow. The sun was created to give us light and is hot to help plants grow and animals live.
When I was in the 6th grade, they told us we were created by water and something in the air, by the time I got to 10th grade their story changed and said we came from Monkeys and Gorillas. I don’t know about you, but I don’t trust people that change their story every 4 years. This sounds very familiar , I think kids are smarter then we think, because when I was younger, kids would come up to me and say “Das you look like a pig” does this kid know something we don’t? Maybe we should try to find him because he may be on to something there! After all if books ( or the people that wrote them ) say we came from apes because we “look” like them, maybe the kid that said I looked like a pig is on to something new! That sounds pretty ridiculous doesn’t it? I figure if you are going to believe something out of this world might aswell believe what’s in the Bible. I found a recent Biology Book printed in 1998 and this is what the book says on the history of the life on earth:

“Many people believe that life was put on earth by a divine force, ( God ) in this view, common to many of the world’s religions, the forces leading to life cannot be explained by science……This possibility is not considered because it is not testable and thus, falls out the realm of science”

Who is this ‘science” guy, that we must believe whatever falls into it’s realm? I am assuming it is some guy that refused to believe in the Bible and went off to makeup some stuff and force his opinion on us. Some will say “well we need proof that God and Jesus existed” What do you want, Polaroid’s? A video tape? Cahriot wheels and boned of horses and humans was discovered in some country by the Read sea and people still refuse to believe. There is your proof that what the Bible said is true. The Bible was made hundreds of thousands of years ago and hasn’t been changed ( the original Bibles ) yet history books and science books change ever year. The worse part is this world forces us to believe what is in these books. Why re-create history when the history of this earth is already explained in the Bible? Why aren’t Bibles allowed in schools, when it is much more believable? If history books are supposed to be filled with facts and figures, why do they change every year? Why don’t they state how the universe came about? I have yet to read a chapter that is filled with so called “facts” all I have seen so far are “scientific facts“ also known as “opinionated facts” . Here is another way to look at it. They say we can’t see oxygen, yet it’s there because without it we can’t breathe. If they can believe in oxygen, something we can’t see, why won’t they believe in God? That is why God tells us not to follow the ways of the earth. The truth and the right way is in his word. You follow the ways of this world and you will be lost and confused, but when you follow God’s word, you will find comfort. Why believe? Like I said earlier, why not? Have you ever thought about why earth is the only planet with all this Oxygen that we breathe daily? Simple earth is also the only planet with life on it. Coincidence? I think not, can life create only one planet with life and oxygen? Can life create a planet that can turn a space ship into toast? ( referring to the Sun )? Can life create such a beautiful night sky with the stars shining? Obviously not, there has to be someone behind this.

 

[StTherese]

God can be described by his attributes, such as Love, Mercy, Knowledge, Wisdom...because in all those things He has, is, and will remain so infinitly. No human mind can encompass all that God Is...He is beyond our comprehension in His Totality, since He is the Creator and we His creation. God in His infinite Mercy, chose to become a man, in Jesus Christ. He did this so that we might find salvation in Him. God is, always has been, and always will be Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

God is beyond any thought, emotion, object, person...etc. that we could possible think of. Any image that we may have about God, is very far from what He Is. We only know of Him what He has chosen to reveal to us throughout history.

 

[DArceri]

The vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our belief in the certainty of its Creator. I find it as difficult to understand a scientist who does not acknowledge the presence of a superior rationality behind the existence of the universe, as it is to comprehend a theologian who would deny the advances of science.

William von Braun, the father of space science



To me, a creator is fact....Now it becomes a question about who is the one and only Creator. But, I don't think that is what your asking here. You want to know if God exists. To me, it would take more faith to be an atheist than a believer in God because, without God the creator, there is no reason or purpose for living. But leaving faith out of the equation, I personally believe God exists by just observing the complexities of existence. It's Masterful.

 

[rocklife]

Okay, let's try this another way. An atheist is, quite simply, someone who lacks belief in any gods. Yes, my icon says I'm an atheist, but perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about.

So what I'm asking for is a definition of "deity" that's specific enough for me to tell whether I believe in any deities or not.

For instance, StTherese said "God IS Existence". Clearly, if I'm asking what a god is, then there must exist something doing the asking, and so, by that definition, God exists. But by this definition, God is an abstraction, and not a sentient or intelligent being. "Existence" doesn't--can't--care whether I believe in it, let alone write a book. So I doubt this is what most people mean they speak of a deity.

One can define "god" the way Einstein did, as the set of all physical laws. Again, by this definition, God exists (and there can be only one such god), but again, this is not a deity that ought to be worshiped; this is not a sapient being.

Many people throughout history thought of a god as a being much like a human, but much more powerful (though not omnipotent or omniscient, and definitely not omnibenevolent). See, for instance, the myths about Zeus turning into a bull to seduce Europa, or of Jacob wrestling with YHWH and winning, or of Thor drinking the ocean. I don't believe that any deity, by this definition, ever existed. I think you'll agree that this is sensible.

Furthermore, I'd like to see whether there's any consensus among Christians as to what the Christian God is. If one person says God is the sum total of everything that exists, and another says that God is a living, intelligent, male being who cares about whether people believe in him, then those appear to be descriptions of quite different things. I would expect someone to say that it's like the blind men describing an elephant, so I'll ask for some explanation as to how both descriptions can refer to the same entity.

Does this help any?

God is Creator of all things and life and seems to be the only one who has made something from nothing

 

[arensb]

You want to know if God exists.

No, what I'm asking here is what you mean when you say "god", and whether or not it's the same thing that other people mean when they use that word.

 

[arensb]

God is Creator of all things and life and seems to be the only one who has made something from nothing

Then clearly God doesn't exist: you can easily think of two different things that were made by two different people, so therefore there is no single entity that matches your definition by having created all things.

 

[Dasdream]

answer this question for me

They say we can’t see oxygen, yet it’s there because without it we can’t breathe. If they can believe in oxygen, something we can’t see, why won’t they believe in God?

 

[DArceri]

No, what I'm asking here is what you mean when you say "god", and whether or not it's the same thing that other people mean when they use that word.

I already gave my response to that earlier (and looking at all the threads, everybody else has too). My question for you is, do you not believe in God because you can't touch or see Him, OR, because your in the "big bang" camp and we're here by chance?

 

[arensb]

God is beyond any thought, emotion, object, person...etc. that we could possible think of. Any image that we may have about God, is very far from what He Is.

You seem to be defining God as being indefinable. Doesn't this mean that you don't know what God (or a god) is?

That is, if I showed you an entity X and asked you whether X is a god (or God), then you wouldn't be able to answer because there are -- and can be -- no criteria for answering that question.

 

[DArceri]

You seem to be defining God as being indefinable. Doesn't this mean that you don't know what God (or a god) is?

That is, if I showed you an entity X and asked you whether X is a god (or God), then you wouldn't be able to answer because there are -- and can be -- no criteria for answering that question.

physically he is undefinable...But that doesn't mean he's not real.

 

[DArceri]

Here's an example I'd like to share with you that I found:

Does space have an end? If it does--if there is a brick wall at the end of space that reads "The End," I want to know what's behind the brick wall. By faith you and I are forced to believe that no matter in which direction we set off, space will never end. It just goes on and on and on--forever. It has no beginning or end. It hurts the brain to think about such a state, but we have no choice but to accept that fact by faith.
God also has no beginning and no end. But with God, we have a little more information than we have with space. Time is a dimension that God has created and it is to this dimension that mankind is subjected. We have to wait for time to pass. We can't jump ahead even one second in time. We are enslaved in its power. It is because we are in time that reason demands a beginning and an end. It hurts the brain to think of any other dimension.
God is not subject to the dimension of time. He dwells in eternity. The Bible tells us that a day to the Lord is as a thousand years to us (see Psalm 90:4 & 2 Peter 3:8). God can flick through time as you and I flick through the pages of a history book. If you find this hard to believe, even when confronted with the evidence of biblical prophecies, you will find it to be true one day. The Scriptures tell us that God will eventually withdraw time, and we will then dwell in eternity.

 

[revmalone]

This should be a fairly simple question:

First of all, what is a god? If you saw a god on the street, how would you know that he/she/it was a god?

Secondly, if that god happened to be a/the God of Christianity, how would you know?

If your answer includes the terms "soul", "spirit", "supernatural", or related terms, please define those as well.

I can think of a few problems that might appear in this thread. I'll attempt to forestall them in a followup post.

(Edit, Nov. 16, 2006: see also this clarification)

Greeting
Jesus said God is Spirit. John 4:23-24
23. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

This is my first explaination. simple but truth. You already know what truth is? Go to a mirror and look into your eyes as you look at your face, the part looking at you in that mirror is your spirit, see that will start to explain to you about the Spirit part.

Your face and body you see is called flesh in Scripture. God is Spirit so that is why he sent his Son in the flesh filled with his Spirit.

Jesus is the true picture of what God was like, Jesus said if you have seen me you have seen the Father.

To know God is to research the Character of Jesus and that will be as close as anyone could get to understand about God.

Happy searching
Rev Malone

 

[StTherese]

You seem to be defining God as being indefinable. Doesn't this mean that you don't know what God (or a god) is?

That is, if I showed you an entity X and asked you whether X is a god (or God), then you wouldn't be able to answer because there are -- and can be -- no criteria for answering that question.

St. Thomas Aquinas, studying the works of the Greek philsopher Aristotle, concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion (e.g. the planets, a rolling stone) is put in motion by some other object or force. From this, Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an UNMOVED MOVER (GOD) who first put things in motion. Follow the agrument this way:

1) Nothing can move itself.

2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first object in motion needed a mover.

3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God.


Second Way: Causation Of Existence

This Way deals with the issue of existence. Aquinas concluded that common sense observation tells us that no object creates itself. In other words, some previous object had to create it. Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things. Follow the agrument this way:

1) There exists things that are caused (created) by other things.

2) Nothing can be the cause of itself (nothing can create itself.)

3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist.

4) Therefore, ther must be an uncaused first cause called God.


Third Way: Contingent and Neccessary Objects

This Way defines two types of objects in the universe: contingent beings and necessary beings. A contingent being is an object that can not exist without a necessary being causing its existence. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. This being, called a necessary being, is what we call God. Follow the argument this way:

1) Contingent beings are caused.

2) Not every being can be contingent.

3) There must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings.

4) This necessary being is God.


Fourth Way: The Agrument From Degrees And Perfection

St. Thomas formulated this Way from a very interesting observation about the qualities of things. For example one may say that of two marble scultures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next. This is referred to as degrees or gradation of a quality. From this fact Aquinas concluded that for any given quality (e.g. goodness, beauty, knowledge) there must be an perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.


Fifth Way: The Agrument From Intelligent Design

The final Way that St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of has to do with the observable universe and the order of nature. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.

Read more about the Existence of God here:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm

http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/veritas.htm

 

[StTherese]

Clement of Alexandria


"The first substance is everything which subsists by itself, as a stone is called a substance. The second is a substance capable of increase, as a plant grows and decays. The third is animated and sentient substance, as animal, horse. The fourth is animate, sentient, rational substance, as man. Wherefore each one of us is made as consisting of all, having an immaterial soul and a mind, which is the image of God" (Fragment from On Providence [A.D. 200]).

"Being is in God. God is divine being, eternal and without beginning, incorporeal and illimitable, and the cause of what exists. Being is that which wholly subsists. Nature is the truth of things, or the inner reality of them. According to others, it is the production of what has come to existence; and according to others, again, it is the providence of God, causing the being, and the manner of being, in the things which are produced" (ibid.).

"What is God? ‘God,’ as the Lord says, ‘is a spirit.’ Now spirit is properly substance, incorporeal, and uncircumscribed. And that is incorporeal which does not consist of a body, or whose existence is not according to breadth, length, and depth. And that is uncircumscribed which has no place, which is wholly in all, and in each entire, and the same in itself" (ibid.).

"No one can rightly express him wholly. For on account of his greatness he is ranked as the All, and is the Father of the universe. Nor are any parts to be predicated of him. For the One is indivisible; wherefore also it is infinite, not considered with reference to inscrutability, but with reference to its being without dimensions, and not having a limit. And therefore it is without form" (Miscellanies 5:12 [A.D. 208]).
http://www.catholic.com/library/God_Has_No_Body.asp

 

[BuzWeaver]

As I mentioned in a previous thread. God is the only being in existence, the reason for whose existence is in himself, every other creature looks for the reason of its existence outside of itself we are all contingent caused and finite. God alone is infinite uncaused and has the reason for existence in himself. We cannot pull the veil beyond that within the finitude of our own mind. How can we who are locked in time and space ever talk in terms that transcend time and space?

 

[ebia]

Okay, let's try this another way. An atheist is, quite simply, someone who lacks belief in any gods. Yes, my icon says I'm an atheist, but perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about.

So what I'm asking for is a definition of "deity" that's specific enough for me to tell whether I believe in any deities or not.

For instance, StTherese said "God IS Existence". Clearly, if I'm asking what a god is, then there must exist something doing the asking, and so, by that definition, God exists. But by this definition, God is an abstraction, and not a sentient or intelligent being. "Existence" doesn't--can't--care whether I believe in it, let alone write a book. So I doubt this is what most people mean they speak of a deity.

One can define "god" the way Einstein did, as the set of all physical laws. Again, by this definition, God exists (and there can be only one such god), but again, this is not a deity that ought to be worshiped; this is not a sapient being.

Many people throughout history thought of a god as a being much like a human, but much more powerful (though not omnipotent or omniscient, and definitely not omnibenevolent). See, for instance, the myths about Zeus turning into a bull to seduce Europa, or of Jacob wrestling with YHWH and winning, or of Thor drinking the ocean. I don't believe that any deity, by this definition, ever existed. I think you'll agree that this is sensible.

Furthermore, I'd like to see whether there's any consensus among Christians as to what the Christian God is. If one person says God is the sum total of everything that exists, and another says that God is a living, intelligent, male being who cares about whether people believe in him, then those appear to be descriptions of quite different things. I would expect someone to say that it's like the blind men describing an elephant, so I'll ask for some explanation as to how both descriptions can refer to the same entity.

Does this help any?

God is a sentient being (that is he thinks, makes choices, is self-aware, etc).
He has one essence yet 3 persons (usually labelled 'Father', 'Son', and 'Holy Spirit') existing in perfect relationship.
He is the creator of everything else.
He is the source of all that is good in us - love, mercy, etc and is the perfect example of those.
He is uncreated and has always existed - he is outside creation so it's doubtful that applying 'time' concepts to him can ever be accurate.

 

[ebia]

St. Thomas Aquinas, studying the works of the Greek philsopher Aristotle, concluded from common observation that an object that is in motion (e.g. the planets, a rolling stone) is put in motion by some other object or force. From this, Aquinas believes that ultimately there must have been an UNMOVED MOVER (GOD) who first put things in motion. Follow the agrument this way:

1) Nothing can move itself.

2) If every object in motion had a mover, then the first object in motion needed a mover.

3) This first mover is the Unmoved Mover, called God.


Second Way: Causation Of Existence

This Way deals with the issue of existence. Aquinas concluded that common sense observation tells us that no object creates itself. In other words, some previous object had to create it. Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things. Follow the agrument this way:

1) There exists things that are caused (created) by other things.

2) Nothing can be the cause of itself (nothing can create itself.)

3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist.

4) Therefore, ther must be an uncaused first cause called God.


Third Way: Contingent and Neccessary Objects

This Way defines two types of objects in the universe: contingent beings and necessary beings. A contingent being is an object that can not exist without a necessary being causing its existence. Aquinas believed that the existence of contingent beings would ultimately neccesitate a being which must exist for all of the contingent beings to exist. This being, called a necessary being, is what we call God. Follow the argument this way:

1) Contingent beings are caused.

2) Not every being can be contingent.

3) There must exist a being which is necessary to cause contingent beings.

4) This necessary being is God.


Fourth Way: The Agrument From Degrees And Perfection

St. Thomas formulated this Way from a very interesting observation about the qualities of things. For example one may say that of two marble scultures one is more beautiful than the other. So for these two objects, one has a greater degree of beauty than the next. This is referred to as degrees or gradation of a quality. From this fact Aquinas concluded that for any given quality (e.g. goodness, beauty, knowledge) there must be an perfect standard by which all such qualities are measured. These perfections are contained in God.


Fifth Way: The Agrument From Intelligent Design

The final Way that St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of has to do with the observable universe and the order of nature. Aquinas states that common sense tells us that the universe works in such a way, that one can conclude that is was designed by an intelligent designer, God. In other words, all physical laws and the order of nature and life were designed and ordered by God, the intellgent designer.

Read more about the Existence of God here:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm

http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/veritas.htm

I guess Aquinas wasn't a physicist.

 

[arensb]

physically he is undefinable...But that doesn't mean he's not real.

Logically speaking, you're right, but this doesn't seem like the sort of thing to get emotionally worked up about. I mean, it's fun to think about things like "is there a thought that you cannot think?", i.e., is there an otherwise sensible configuration of neural firings that can never be reached from your present configuration? While it's a fun topic for dinner conversation, it seems silly to base one's life around it.