"God"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eucharisted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Eucharisted

Guest
How do atheists define a “god”?

For me, a god is a perfect being. A being has life, so a god has a perfect life. As such, the god would be perfectly happy, perfectly alive, and perfectly self-sustaining and -existent. Perfection is absolutely good, so the god would be absolutely good. In him would be every good quality: power, knowledge, morality, glory, etc. For such a level of perfection, though, it would require infinity: infinite perfection. So the god would be infinitly and perfectly happy, infinitely and perfectly alive, infinitely and perfectly self-sustaining and -existent. As such, the being is perfectly infinite. But such a level of infinity and perfection could not be possible unless the god was the source and summit of all perfection and infinity; that is, perfection and infinity itself. In light of that, and because the qualities of the god would be the sources and summits of that which they are, and because perfection is absolutely simple, the god would be his own qualities, whereby, he would be life itself, existent itself, goodness itself, happiness itself. However, with such a god in existent, and being the source and summit of every good quality, there could not be any god in existent, because, if any other god existed, it would mean that the god was lacking in some perfection and there would be a confusing source of good qualities, since a god is a perfect being. As such, multiple gods is a contradiction of what a god is, and hence, impossible. Therefore, I believe there can be only one god. And that is God.
 
By the way, don’t give me an answer along the lines of “I don’t believe in God” or “What dose it matter?” because that is just dodging the question. If you don’t want to answer, than just ignore this thread. Otherwise, feel free to let me know what your definition of a god is.
 
We don’t. We let you guys define it, and then we’ll tell you whether we believe in that or not. Why would we just imagine up definitions for something like that?
 
The God I don’t believe in is a cohesive being that meets any of the following criteria:
  1. Created the universe;
  2. Created humans, animals et al.;
  3. Set the designs and physical laws for the universe in place and let those laws (including evolution) do the rest;
  4. Hears any or all of our individual thoughts and/or prayers;
  5. Holds any of the omnimax attributes;
  6. Is infinite, eternal etc.;
  7. Performs miracles through any of his alleged manifestations;
  8. Is able to influence our physical universe by non-physical means.
His personal attributes are completely irrelevant.

Regarding “small g” gods, at a pinch I guess I’d define them as any sentient, supernatural entity.
 
liquidpele said:
We don’t. We let you guys define it, and then we’ll tell you whether we believe in that or not. Why would we just imagine up definitions for something like that?
Click to expand...
Quite so - I should qualify my post by saying that the definitions I have listed are qualities that have been ascribed to God by theists. If you like, I am responding to what I consider to be the most common posited definitions of God.
 
I define the term “God” as nothing more than a manifested definition to explain the unknown. As long as civilization has existed, God(s) has/have always been a part of our culture. To believe, follow, fear, etc a “God” gives people purpose and certainty within life and allows them to not feel alone within their societies or our universe. I find that many will also use “God” as a way to deflect their responsibilities as humans, such as “God wills it” or even “God made me do it.” Now this doesn’t mean I don’t believe in God but my belief in a higher being is not limited to just man made beliefs but to the possibility of what we don’t know and try to rationalize as “the way”.
 
Eucharisted said:
How do atheists define a “god”?
Click to expand...
A god is a higher being* worshipped by humans. A personalised image of certain human concepts (like your “perfectness”) or natural forces.
  • “Higher” meaning the being is not directly accessible to human perception by the usual means.
 
Eucharisted said:
How do atheists define a “god”?

For me, a god is a perfect being. A being has life, so a god has a perfect life. As such, the god would be perfectly happy, perfectly alive, and perfectly self-sustaining and -existent. Perfection is absolutely good, so the god would be absolutely good. In him would be every good quality: power, knowledge, morality, glory, etc. For such a level of perfection, though, it would require infinity: infinite perfection. So the god would be infinitly and perfectly happy, infinitely and perfectly alive, infinitely and perfectly self-sustaining and -existent. As such, the being is perfectly infinite. But such a level of infinity and perfection could not be possible unless the god was the source and summit of all perfection and infinity; that is, perfection and infinity itself. In light of that, and because the qualities of the god would be the sources and summits of that which they are, and because perfection is absolutely simple, the god would be his own qualities, whereby, he would be life itself, existent itself, goodness itself, happiness itself. However, with such a god in existent, and being the source and summit of every good quality, there could not be any god in existent, because, if any other god existed, it would mean that the god was lacking in some perfection and there would be a confusing source of good qualities, since a god is a perfect being. As such, multiple gods is a contradiction of what a god is, and hence, impossible. Therefore, I believe there can be only one god. And that is God.
Click to expand...
I like this definition: *God is the anthropomorphization of the unknown.

*That seems to subsume your definition along with a great many other more concrete definitions of God. If you talk to ten theists, you are likely to come away with a dozen different definitions of God. Each person finds the perimeters of their knowledge at different places, and assigns different levels of importance to various questions without knowledge-based answers, and this provides the grounding for the variation and diversity of concepts of God for those who desire an “answer beyond knowledge” for those questions.

God then, is the being we imagine that can fill in the frustrating and compelling gaps in our knowledge, the person that can answer the questions we demand answers for, even when our knowledge fails.

-Touchstone
 
I find it interesting that some atheists would regard a god as an anthropomorphic character (even a sapient being) and that others still believe in the “similarity of beliefs means mythical falsehood” fallacy. As for the claim that that we Catholics believe in God in man’s or the world’s image, that is far from the truth. From the Catechism:
39 In defending the ability of human reason to know God, the Church is expressing her confidence in the possibility of speaking about him to all men and with all men, and therefore of dialogue with other religions, with philosophy and science, as well as with unbelievers and atheists.
Click to expand...
40 Since our knowledge of God is limited, our language about him is equally so. We can name God only by taking creatures as our starting point, and in accordance with our limited human ways of knowing and thinking.
Click to expand...
41 All creatures bear a certain resemblance to God, most especially man, created in the image and likeness of God. the manifold perfections of creatures - their truth, their goodness, their beauty all reflect the infinite perfection of God. Consequently we can name God by taking his creatures" perfections as our starting point, “for from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator”.15
Click to expand...
42 God transcends all creatures. We must therefore continually purify our language of everything in it that is limited, imagebound or imperfect, if we are not to confuse our image of God --“the inexpressible, the incomprehensible, the invisible, the ungraspable”-- with our human representations.16 Our human words always fall short of the mystery of God.
Click to expand...
43 Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that “between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude”;17 and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."18
Click to expand...
2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of “idols, (of) silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see.” These empty idols make their worshippers empty: "Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them."42 God, however, is the "living God"43 who gives life and intervenes in history.
Click to expand...
 
I’ll agree with liquidpele.

I like to let you guys define God and then deal with each of the attributes you give him one by one.
 
Eucharisted said:
I find it interesting that some atheists would regard a god as an anthropomorphic character (even a sapient being) and that others still believe in the “similarity of beliefs means mythical falsehood” fallacy. As for the claim that that we Catholics believe in God in man’s or the world’s image, that is far from the truth. From the Catechism:
Click to expand...
So he is a very elaborated anthropomorphic character, paired with lots of enigmas and mysticism to make him more interesting.
 
AnAtheist said:
So he is a very elaborated anthropomorphic character, paired with lots of enigmas and mysticism to make him more interesting.
Click to expand...
One of these days you atheists are going to find out that the mystery which you believe created the Universe is God Himself, who, in the ancient sense of the word “mystery”, is the greatest Mystery. Indeed, what science calls mystery, we recognize and acknowledge to be mystery as well - the Mystery of God. It is only that the scientific data has yet to be completed by the religious data, both of which are provided by God for the good of man.
 
Isn’t asking an atheist to define God like asking me to define a widget?
 
Eucharisted said:
One of these days you atheists are going to find out that the mystery which you believe created the Universe is God Himself, who, in the ancient sense of the word “mystery”, is the greatest Mystery.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But why should I become a Muslim and praise this God Himself in a very certain manner? (You may cut “Muslim” and insert any other monotheistic term there.)
 
Eucharisted said:
One of these days you atheists are going to find out that the mystery which you believe created the Universe is God Himself, who, in the ancient sense of the word “mystery”, is the greatest Mystery.
Click to expand...
You seem incredibly sure of that. Most people wouldn’t make such a definitive claim about anything without the evidence to back it up. What is yours?
 
AnAtheist said:
Maybe. But why should I become a Muslim and praise this God Himself in a very certain manner? (You may cut “Muslim” and insert any other monotheistic term there.)
Click to expand...
Why do you assume that? You have free-will.
 
Wow, I just wasted twenty minutes writing a better and scientific respond than the more emotional and reactionary post above. Dang time limits.
 
wanstronian said:
  1. Set the designs and physical laws for the universe in place and let those laws (including evolution) do the rest;
  2. Is able to influence our physical universe by non-physical means.
Click to expand...
You have it a little wrong in this regard:

God doesn’t “wind up” the universe like a watchman. He is omnipresent (Oops, I used that word), meaning all present. Through Revelation, we believe He is consciously aware of every point in space, every moment in time, every particle of matter, etc.
So, that being the case, God doesn’t “set it and forget it”; It is His Will that keeps everything continually in existence. Without the constant support of God, you and I and everything in that exists would simply lapse into nothingness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top