NationStates Jolt Archive

Very simple: What is "God"?

Define "God" for us.

For the purposes of 90% of the religion threads (or 45% of all threads;)):
the deity/trinity presented in Abrahamic religious doctrine.
Magik powaz include: omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, creator ex nihilo, and granter of free will.

Is it Holy (Moley) Week on NSG or something? What IS it with all the religious threads as of late?!

God does not care to be defined by you mere mortals.

God is the one deity of the three Abrahamic religions, also know as "Adonai", "Yahweh", "Allah", "Elohim", and a few dozen other names.

God. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/God)

God is the space between your scrotum and your asshole.

God is the one deity of the three Abrahamic religions, also know as "Adonai", "Yahweh", "Allah", "Elohim", and a few dozen other names.

Did God tell you this - where do you people get your information from?

Any adjective following 'God is...' fails.

God is or God isn't, that's as much as we can guess.

El Shaddai, El Shaddai, Er Kam Karna Adoni.

El Shaddai, El Shaddai, Er Kam Karna Adoni.

Good song, I can play it on the harmonica.

Did God tell you this - where do you people get your information from?

Any adjective following 'God is...' fails.

God is or God isn't, that's as much as we can guess.

no, God did not tell me this. The word God specifically refers to the single deity of those three religions. I said nothing about His existance. It is the same as stating "Zeus was the highest god of the Greeks".

I was asked to define the word "God".

God. Proper Noun. The single deity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

no, God did not tell me this. The word God specifically refers to the single deity of those three religions. I said nothing about His existance. It is the same as stating "Zeus was the highest god of the Greeks".

I was asked to define the word "God".

God. Proper Noun. The single deity of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

That's just your definition, one that isn't shared by millions if not billions.

If I ask you to describe an apple, nearly everyone has a similar image and attributes similar qualities - hell, I could pretty much say the same for a fairy.

But God - impossible to define.

Impossible to define using human tools such as language.

God could also be interpreted as the universal concept of Hinduism and the Brahma (I forget the proper term, pleaaase be correct) and Nirvana of Buddhism. Polytheistic religions could be interpreted as just aspects of God represented in ways that people could understand.

I'm glad more people than I know that song.

That's just your definition, one that isn't shared by millions if not billions.

If I ask you to describe an apple, nearly everyone has a similar image and attributes similar qualities - hell, I could pretty much say the same for a fairy.

But God - impossible to define.

No, actually, in the English language, the word God with a capital letter it is a proper noun. It is the same as saying "His name is Ryan" or "The highest Roman god was Jupiter". "The god of the Abrahamic religions is God."

We can look to the OED:
II. In the specific Christian and monotheistic sense. The One object of supreme adoration; the Creator and Ruler of the Universe. (Now always with initial capital.)

Or Mirriam-Webster
1capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a: the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe bChristian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind

Or Cambridge
God (MAKER) Show phonetics
noun [S not after the]
(in especially Christian, Jewish and Muslim belief) the being which made the universe, the Earth and its people and is believed to have an effect on all things:

All of the above definitions relate to a monotheistic deity, specifically relating to the Abrahamic religions. Debate all you want, that is the modern usage of the word "God".

God is the space between your scrotum and your asshole.

That taint true.

Polytheistic religions could be interpreted as just aspects of God represented in ways that people could understand.

But that would be incredibly culturally imperialistic, ethnocentric, and ignorant.

For me God would have to be a enity that is on a higher plane of existent than us, and there may be more than one Gods. My bet is that there's at least a female Goddess and a male God. I mean everything else in our lives are masculine and feminine.

God does not care to be defined by you mere mortals.

God is or God isn't, that's as much as we can guess.

But God - impossible to define.

So basically, what you just told me is that you believe in something that may or may not exist and can't be defined. And others are expected to do the same.
But I really don't think I could ever believe in something if I couldn't explain what it was (and saying God is "impossible to define" is an extremely cheap cop-out).

Define "God" for us.

ME!!!

But that would be incredibly culturally imperialistic, ethnocentric, and ignorant.
Please elaborate. I'd like to know why.

Imperialistic - I am not trying to create a cultural empire; I am not trying to dominate a religion and incorporate it into my own for my own gain. Nor am I trying to impose my will on polytheistic religions by interpreting their deities as aspects of one deity.

Ethnocentric - wait, religion is based on Ethnicity now?

Ignorant - Interpretation? Not only did I say 'could' but before I have an opinion on any religion I tend to actually know what it is.

No, actually, in the English language, the word God with a capital letter it is a proper noun. It is the same as saying "His name is Ryan" or "The highest Roman god was Jupiter". "The god of the Abrahamic religions is God."

We can look to the OED:


Or Mirriam-Webster


Or Cambridge


All of the above definitions relate to a monotheistic deity, specifically relating to the Abrahamic religions. Debate all you want, that is the modern usage of the word "God".


You're taking one definition from dictionaries that conform to your cultural view.

Even if I accept your definition as the Abrahamic, monotheistic supreme being, there are millions of definitions within that description as well.

About the only definition we can apply is: God is unknowable.

It's not a cop-out - to state anything about God is instantly attackable by anyone, as I'm showing right now - we can argue definitions for eternity because there is no means of definitively stating what God is.

Please elaborate. I'd like to know why.

Imperialistic - I am not trying to create a cultural empire; I am not trying to dominate a religion and incorporate it into my own for my own gain. Nor am I trying to impose my will on polytheistic religions by interpreting their deities as aspects of one deity.Culturally imperialistic because one would be taking the polytheistic culture and forcing it to fit the mold of their own. They are polytheistic. No, their many gods are not "aspects" of a monotheistic God. They are individual. Just look at their mythology as compared to monotheism.

Ethnocentric - wait, religion is based on Ethnicity now?
It relates to culture, which, in turn, relates to religion. One claims theirs is superior and the only true one: the polytheists clearly have it wrong, and their gods must just be different representations of a monotheistic God. Clearly, a monotheistic God could never be an amalgamation of their many gods.

Ignorant - Interpretation? Not only did I say 'could' but before I have an opinion on any religion I tend to actually know what it is.

Did I say I was targeting you specifically? I said that to call polytheistic deitys simply "aspects of a monotheistic God" would be culturally imperialistic, ethnocentric, and ignorant. I did not call you any of those things, nor your opinions, unless you happen to hold this specific view.

So basically, what you just told me is that you believe in something that may or may not exist and can't be defined. And others are expected to do the same.
But I really don't think I could ever believe in something if I couldn't explain what it was (and saying God is "impossible to define" is an extremely cheap cop-out).

I don't believe in anything, partly because I'd have no idea what to believe in given the multitude of options.

It's like asking 'what's the best car' - impossible to answer really without having an idea of what the car might be used for - but at least we can agree on what a car is.

You're taking one definition from dictionaries that conform to your cultural view.Three of the most respected dictionaries none the less. How intellectually dishonest can I get?!

I took the definitions of the word "god", and specified the version that is capitalized, as that is what was requested. The OP asked that I
Define "God" for us.

I defined the word "God", using my definition, the OED, the Mirriam-Webster, and the Cambridge. All of these concur about the usage of the capitalized word "God"
Even if I accept your definition as the Abrahamic, monotheistic supreme being, there are millions of definitions within that description as well.
Yes, as there are millions of variations among all words, particualrly abstractions. Yet, all variations of those definitions relating to the word "God" come back to my initial definit"ion.

About the only definition we can apply is: God is unknowable.
That's wonderful. That isn't a definition. That is a characteristic. The question posed is simple: "Define 'God'". This is no different from asking "Define 'table'" or "Define 'duck'".
It's not a cop-out - to state anything about God is instantly attackable by anyone, as I'm showing right now - we can argue definitions for eternity because there is no means of definitively stating what God is.
Can you demonstrate that my definition is at all wrong or inaccurate by anyones opinion? Does the word "God" refer to the deity of the Abrahamic religions, or does it not? In the English language, does this word solely refer to that deity? Is it directly synonymous with "Dieu", "Dio", "Deus", and "Dios" in French, Italian, Portugese, and Spanish, respectively? Are all of these distinctly seperated from their lower-case counterparts as a referent to a specific god, namely the god of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam?

You will find that, after the first question posed, the answer to all of those is "Yes"

We're not being asked, though apologies if we are, to define the word God as an English word derived from Ancient Greek.

We're being asked to say what we mean by the word God - I'm saying it's undefinable as a whole whereas you're defining it through your own cultural lens.

Try and describe God - it's not the same as defining a table at all.

It's impossible to give a single, definitive attribute.

Culturally imperialistic because one would be taking the polytheistic culture and forcing it to fit the mold of their own. They are polytheistic. No, their many gods are not "aspects" of a monotheistic God. They are individual. Just look at their mythology as compared to monotheism.
Monotheism and Polytheism are purely classifications used to simplify matters of religious study and philosophy. For example, many consider Hinduism to be polytheistic, yet is considered to be Monotheistic by a certain practicing Hindu I know, who actually does consider the deities to be aspects of a greater deity, yet is too large and grand for a human being to comprehend. So Monotheism and Polytheism are connoted terms which are open to interpretation. So by taking a religion and dividing them into 'Monotheistic' or 'Polytheistic', you are forcing them into a mold of your own. And by the definition of 'Imperialistic' I assume you mean that it would be trying to expand a cultural 'empire' which does not exist to my knowledge.

It relates to culture, which, in turn, relates to religion. One claims theirs is superior and the only true one: the polytheists clearly have it wrong, and their gods must just be different representations of a monotheistic God. Clearly, a monotheistic God could never be an amalgamation of their many gods.

Sorry, I assumed one definition of 'Ethnocentric'. My apologies. Still, what it means is that This could be how God/Gods/Cthulu revealed Him/Her/It Self to them, and that is how it could be interpreted according to the current world view. Conversely, I could say that my God is actually just a unified concept of several beings/deities/Gods. Neither is correct nor incorrect, since we cannot know the true nature of God, and it is simply the easiest way to relate their beliefs to another. Nor does this assume that Monotheism or Polytheism is the actual opinion, since we cannot know the true nature of God, and thus we refer to the singularity/plurality of God/s as a human adaptation to a concept we cannot understand.

Did I say I was targeting you specifically? I said that to call polytheistic deitys simply "aspects of a monotheistic God" would be culturally imperialistic, ethnocentric, and ignorant. I did not call you any of those things, nor your opinions, unless you happen to hold this specific view.
Excuse me, I assumed they were directed at myself. Apologies again. Once again, I was simply putting this out there, and emphasize that I cannot know whether or not this is true.

We're not being asked, though apologies if we are, to define the word God as an English word derived from Ancient Greek.

We're being asked to say what we mean by the word God - I'm saying it's undefinable as a whole whereas you're defining it through your own cultural lens.I would say that was the case had the OP said "Define God" rather than "Define 'God'". Generally, quotations around a proper noun are used to signify a literal meaning, rather than a philosophical or emotional meaning: for example, "Define John" would mean "that boy over there", whereas "Define 'John'" would mean "God is gracious". Of course, I may be reading too much into some quotes.

Try and describe God - it's not the same as defining a table at all.defining "God" and "table" is the same when defining the word.
Defining and abstract vs. concrete referent, however, is, as you said, quite different.
Ergo, it relies upon those damned quotation marks
It's impossible to give a single, definitive attribute.
Yes.

Monotheism and Polytheism are purely classifications used to simplify matters of religious study and philosophy. For example, many consider Hinduism to be polytheistic, yet is considered to be Monotheistic by a certain practicing Hindu I know, who actually does consider the deities to be aspects of a greater deity, yet is too large and grand for a human being to comprehend. So Monotheism and Polytheism are connoted terms which are open to interpretation. So by taking a religion and dividing them into 'Monotheistic' or 'Polytheistic', you are forcing them into a mold of your own. And by the definition of 'Imperialistic' I assume you mean that it would be trying to expand a cultural 'empire' which does not exist to my knowledge.
Yes, they are arbitrary categories used for religious study and philosophy. However true that may be, they are clearly defined: monotheism is one god, polytheism is many.
Your friend may very well consider Hinduism to be monotheistic, and would have grounds to start a new sect or even religion on that basis. But even with that consideration, his viewpoint is distinctly monotheistic, as their is one superior being, regardless of the number of other forms it may take.

Sorry, I assumed one definition of 'Ethnocentric'. My apologies. Still, what it means is that This could be how God/Gods/Cthulu revealed Him/Her/It Self to them, and that is how it could be interpreted according to the current world view. Conversely, I could say that my God is actually just a unified concept of several beings/deities/Gods. Neither is correct nor incorrect, since we cannot know the true nature of God, and it is simply the easiest way to relate their beliefs to another. Nor does this assume that Monotheism or Polytheism is the actual opinion, since we cannot know the true nature of God, and thus we refer to the singularity/plurality of God/s as a human adaptation to a concept we cannot understand.
The very fact that it is the most simple and easy way to relate two belief systems is its weakness. It is far too simplistic, and ignores thousands upon thousands of stark and glaring differences and contradictions. Yes, it sounds nice. However, going from a purely ethnographic point of view (which is how I approach this), discrete religions are not just aspects of one great religion: they are individual belief systems of individual and discrete cultures.

Excuse me, I assumed they were directed at myself. Apologies again. Once again, I was simply putting this out there, and emphasize that I cannot know whether or not this is true.No need to apologize. Sarky may or may not be having an agressive night :)

Very simple: What is "God"?

Define "God" for us.

I remember reading that quesiton somewhere else... Ah yes.

John 14
5 Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?" 6Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him."

8 Philip said to him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. 11Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

Thus, to define God, we must only define Jesus. To define Jesus, go read the gospels.

That guy I finished off with X-Magic: Fallen One, Ultima.

Good song, I can play it on the harmonica.

I can sing the alto part. :p

How one may define God depends on that person's experince with life. While a religious man will claim that God is the one mentioned in his/her religion an atheist will call God a global sham while the agnostic will have a different view.

In my view, God is the entity who set the ball rolling. The creator of energy and matter. After the universe was born, God became the watcher.
The universe took its own turns.

god, by dictionary terms, is:

all-powerfull, all knowing, everywhere, everlasting, and all loving

but describing god with words is like decsribing a bowl of fruit with the annual rainfall in the pacific northwest.

not only does that not make any sense, but the two things have nothing to do with each other. and so, they cannot be used as accurate descriptions.

Abrahamic God: Creator of matter, life, free will, energy, etc. I guess the scientific version might be Mr. Big Bang.

I'd go with: "God is a bunch of hokey-pokey!"
I'd rather discuss something that of significance, like bananas for eample.

(sorry for my bad english)

doG backwards???!!!

define("God","a three lettered proper noun signifying the Abrahamic deity");

God is the one deity of the three Abrahamic religions, also know as "Adonai", "Yahweh", "Allah", "Elohim", and a few dozen other names.

uh in islam there are 100 names for god

God is Eris and Eris is hot.

god, by dictionary terms, is:

all-powerfull, all knowing, everywhere, everlasting, and all lovingThat's what Christians believe, but certainly not what a dictionary would say (except a Christian dictionary perhaps).

God does not care to be defined by you mere mortals.

Spoken with such force. I love it and completely agree.

Whatever force is in charge of the universe, even if its just logic, it needs not to answer to you, especially those of you that refuse to believe in it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_%28disambiguation%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_%28disambiguation%29

It missed out Eric Clapton in the music section :)

It missed out Eric Clapton in the music section :)

Well, thread's over, I've defined God... with the Disambiguation page.

How about:

An entity capable of defining the word "God" in a way so that
A) every human would agree to it and
B) the definition does not need to reference itself.

Very simple: What is "God"? Define "God" for us.

god. noun, masculine. plural form: gods. feminine form: goddess, pl. goddesses
Germanic stem (german: Gott)

A very powerful supernatural (i.e, not necessarily bound by natural laws or measurable through observables and experiments) entity, used by various human cultures to:

1.Justify some cultural/social superstructures and phenomena (examples: moral, ethics, exploitation of one group over the other, war)

2.Explain what is unexplained by logical/scientifical means (Ancient Greeks claimed that some atmospherical electromagnetical phenomena, as the lightning, were the product of a god called "Zeus").

Some cultures claim that there is no "god" (see: atheism). Some other cultures claim that there is a single "god" - in this case, the "God" form, with the capitalized initial, is also used. Some other cultures claim that there are many "gods" (see: pantheon).

About 3 centuries ago, it was proven, by Immanuel Kant, that the existance of such "god" entity defies logics at such level that logics cannot be used to determine whether a "god" exists or not.

Is it Holy (Moley) Week on NSG or something? What IS it with all the religious threads as of late?!

Well it is almost Christmas!

Which makes me wonder how many of our Atheist friends celebrate Christmas?

In my view, God is the entity who set the ball rolling. The creator of energy and matter. After the universe was born, God became the watcher.
The universe took its own turns.

This is pretty much what my definition is, as well. God is simply the result of the First Cause argument; any sentience, ambition, power or benevolence attributed to such an entity is a completely different debate. Though, I admit, the concept of something that can entirely ignore the very laws of the universe strikes me as rather silly.

Well it is almost Christmas!

Which makes me wonder how many of our Atheist friends celebrate Christmas?

A mixture of the tradition of the Roman Sol festival, Christian additions and modern commercialisation.

a big, friendly, invissible awairness, about which lots of people try to pretend they know more then anyone does.

=^^=
.../\...

Well it is almost Christmas!

Which makes me wonder how many of our Atheist friends celebrate Christmas?

Hey! Any excuse to get together with friends and family, enjoy good food, exchange gifts, and toss down a few eggnogs is fine by me :D

I'm up to the 12th religous thread this week. WOW.

cameroi celebrates the winter solstice, along with the summer and the vernal and autumnal equanoxis. our other national holidays include things like world peace day, indiginous people's day, little furry critters day, pretty colored lights day, which sometimes corrisponds to winter solstice, honoring the creation of beauty day, imaginative and exotic gardining day, twisty cave day, clear water day, and others of a similar sort.

=^^=
.../\...

cameroi celebrates the winter solstice, along with the summer and the vernal and autumnal equanoxis. our other national holidays include things like world peace day, indiginous people's day, little furry critters day, pretty colored lights day, which sometimes corrisponds to winter solstice, honoring the creation of beauty day, imaginative and exotic gardining day, twisty cave day, clear water day, and others of a similar sort.

=^^=
.../\...

Twisty cave day is one of my faves!

uh in islam there are 100 names for god
Thats nice. Somewhat irrelevant, but nice none the less.
Well it is almost Christmas!

Which makes me wonder how many of our Atheist friends celebrate Christmas?
How is October 17 "almost Christmas"?

Thats nice. Somewhat irrelevant, but nice none the less.

How is October 17 "almost Christmas"?

How is it not?

god is a backwards dog

How is it not?

because there is still halloween, thanksgiving, and pearl harbor day between today and December 25th? And because it is still over 2 months away...

Hell, why don't we just start saying "It's almost Christmas!" on June 26th

Very simple: What is "God"?

Define "God" for us.

God is that which one worships. He/She/It could be an inanimate object, for instance money, A feeling, for instance lust, a person, for instance Adrian Paul, or a product of wishful thinking, for instance God.

Very simple: What is "God"?

Define "God" for us.

No problem. God is the force that created something out of nothing.

Christians: "Santa Claus put the presents under the tree!"

Atheist: "There ain't no Santy Claus little boy."

Non-religious Theist: "Perhaps. But someone must have put the presents there."

Atheist: "They just appeared there. Anyone who thinks some idiot put them there is off their rocker."

It's impossible to come up with a definition of "God" that will please everyone of every religion and non-religion. But that wasn't the question, as I see it.

For me, God represents love. I see Him as an actual being, though not physical. He's the one place I can count on finding love and support in my life. He's there to talk to when I need someone.

It's impossible to come up with a definition of "God" that will please everyone.?? A definition is not supposed to please anyone. It's supposed to be accurate.

?? A definition is not supposed to please anyone. It's supposed to be accurate.

Ok, fine then: it's impossible to come up with a definition that will be correct and accurate for all religious and non-religious belief systems.

God is Eris and Eris is hot.

Considering the pages of discord(ia) - you win