For Christians, define god

[Rhea]

I am a Christian, actually. But I note that the vast majority of the people posting in this thread are not. Are you mad at all the atheists cluttering up the thread too, or just me?

I'm not mad at anyone. I just finally got to the point where I understood what you were contributing.

 

[Politesse]

I am a Christian, actually. But I note that the vast majority of the people posting in this thread are not. Are you mad at all the atheists cluttering up the thread too, or just me?

I'm not mad at anyone. I just finally got to the point where I understood what you were contributing.

For what quality of "understood"?

For someone who isn't mad, you sure get.... huffy?

 

[Rhea]

I am a Christian, actually.

So how do you distinguish your Christian God from Xiao, the flying monkey of China?

Your "summary" of my point has little or nothing to do with anything I have written. The vast majority of Christians would agree that God cannot be fully known - that element of theology is very ancient and very widespread. It is dogma for Catholics, who represent the numerical majority of Christians worldwide. This is not the same thing as not desiring to know God, however. Do you reject every subject you think you might not master?

Like children arguing over whether or not they felt loved by their earthly mother, such disagreements are likely beyond any rational conclusion.

Politesse.
None of us are asking for your god to be FULLY KNOWN. If that's your excuse for not even giving the tiniest bit of definition, then you are hiding behind a straw man.

Why can you not answer even the tiniest question? Everything you've said is a dodge and a weave. I said "I get it, you will not discuss" and now you're saying, "no! I will! It's just that there's nothing to discuss."

I am all ears here. All ears. Tell us how you define your god, to yourself, so that you can tell the difference between it and a hole in the ground.

We are asking and asking and all you have given is, "but, well, you can't this and it's impossible that, and there's really no this and people disagree on that,"
What, for the love of reason, do you believe in?

 

[Angry Floof]

I got it! God is defined as dodging questions!

 

[Rhea]

[

I'm not mad at anyone. I just finally got to the point where I understood what you were contributing.

For what quality of "understood"?

For the quality of making a definition that has decent accuracy at predicting the next thing you'll say. It's a fair measure of understanding. Take a politician, if I can start to predict which way she'll vote, I can start to say that I think I understand her point of view. Since I got to the point of understanding, I have been comfortable that what I think you'll do, you do. So I can begin to feel confident that I have not misinterpreted what you said any more.

For someone who isn't mad, you sure get.... huffy?

What's huffy? How am I portraying huffy? I don't feel huffy. I admit I am splitting my brain between you and my daughter's science experiment, my tax return preparation, the new TV remote and thoughts of dinner. Maybe that comes off as "huffy?" Also I tend to write in very choppy sentences which some people view as angry and impatient and I sip my wine and have no idea why they think that.

 

[Rhea]

And for those who have forgotten, Kudos to Lion who answered the question. His answer surprises me, but he did answer that he defines god as everything and you can't tell the difference between it and any other god and so all holy books are equally true and atheists are right also.

 

[skepticalbip]

I got it! God is defined as dodging questions!

That's not completely true. Politesse did offer a small glimpse into her understanding of god. At least I hope it was only a small glimpse rather than anywhere near complete.

... snip...

No one claims that God is anything remotely like a sprig of basil.

... snip...

Although some animists may argue about discounting basil, at least Politesse doesn't.

 

[Politesse]

For the quality of making a definition that has decent accuracy at predicting the next thing you'll say. It's a fair measure of understanding. Take a politician, if I can start to predict which way she'll vote, I can start to say that I think I understand her point of view. Since I got to the point of understanding, I have been comfortable that what I think you'll do, you do. So I can begin to feel confident that I have not misinterpreted what you said any more.

For someone who isn't mad, you sure get.... huffy?

What's huffy? How am I portraying huffy? I don't feel huffy. I admit I am splitting my brain between you and my daughter's science experiment, my tax return preparation, the new TV remote and thoughts of dinner. Maybe that comes off as "huffy?" Also I tend to write in very choppy sentences which some people view as angry and impatient and I sip my wine and have no idea why they think that.

If you correctly predicted that I would not agree with your "summary" of my position, what was the point?

 

[Learner]

I feel like maybe you really do not understand the question,

Can you DEFINE your god?

Can you explain what or who it is, what makes it different from Santa claus or a termite or a cloud. Obviously at this point you can’t proselytize your god because you don’t really have any idea what he is, except a character in a book. So maybe you’re leaving the proselytizing to others.

Although, come to think of it, they all seem to proselytize the book, not the god really anyway, don’t they? I hadn’t really thought about that before, but now that I ponder it, they seem to.

It’s just so unexpected. I did not really think the answer to this question would be, “I dunno, really, just ‘god,’ you know, like ‘spirit’, like it says in the book.”

I thought it was more sophisticated than that.
And I figured it was more important than that, too. Not being able to distinguish between your god and anyone else’s seems more careless than I expected.

But all right.
“just ‘god,’ you know, like ‘spirit’, like it says in the book.”


What does your god do, then?

"
Hmmm , It seems you really didn't accept my reply as an answer after all. It's understandable to "still" want to make use of the "define God" thingy ....being so used to using it for so long.

 

[Politesse]

So how do you distinguish your Christian God from Xiao, the flying monkey of China?

I'm not really able to process this question adequately, I don't think. If you mean by "my" something like "my personal conception of God" I can tell because it is in my head, as opposed to someone else's. But I'm fairly sure that's not the kind of definition you want.

Christianity is an awkward inclusion here. It does not belong to me, and though it has been a very important influence on me over the years, I keep "Christian portrayals of God" bracketed in my head, a significant but not exclusive source of meaning. It's a way of thinking of God, but she is not confined by it, only described.

I guess you mean something like "As a Christian...", but I can't speak for all Christians, as I was accused of doing a few posts up. Christianity describes a social community united by a shared history and resulting in similar cultures and philosophical languages. It is not, and has never been, any particular claim about what God is. Our entire history has been one of schism, from its earliest documents to its modern communities, and the nature of God is a common trigger point. One reason why I stay prudently away from the question as a general rule.

The xiao is more like a mythical beast than a god, I think?

 

[Rhea]

For the quality of making a definition that has decent accuracy at predicting the next thing you'll say. It's a fair measure of understanding. Take a politician, if I can start to predict which way she'll vote, I can start to say that I think I understand her point of view. Since I got to the point of understanding, I have been comfortable that what I think you'll do, you do. So I can begin to feel confident that I have not misinterpreted what you said any more.

If you correctly predicted that I would not agree with your "summary" of my position, what was the point?

I predicted that you would not be inclined to add any detail to the description of the god that you believe in, that you would only add more words saying definitions are not possible. That's fine, I was just confused at first because I thought you were in this thread to add some. Now that I think I understand that you don't think such a thing is possible or worth discussing, I don't have to look for it any more or worry that I missed it.

 

[Politesse]

For the quality of making a definition that has decent accuracy at predicting the next thing you'll say. It's a fair measure of understanding. Take a politician, if I can start to predict which way she'll vote, I can start to say that I think I understand her point of view. Since I got to the point of understanding, I have been comfortable that what I think you'll do, you do. So I can begin to feel confident that I have not misinterpreted what you said any more.

If you correctly predicted that I would not agree with your "summary" of my position, what was the point?

I predicted that you would not be inclined to add any detail to the description of the god that you believe in, that you would only add more words saying definitions are not possible. That's fine, I was just confused at first because I thought you were in this thread to add some. Now that I think I understand that you don't think such a thing is possible or worth discussing, I don't have to look for it any more or worry that I missed it.

I don't know how you gathered from any of my posts, all of which were about the problems with your question, that I was attempting to answer it the way you wanted.

"You're asking the wrong question" is a perfectly valid response to your query, and the only honest one. I don't have God's home mailing address, and neither does anyone else.

Doesn't it strike you as a little odd than none of the Christians who have responded found the question to be a meaningful one as asked?

 

[skepticalbip]

So how do you distinguish your Christian God from Xiao, the flying monkey of China?

I'm not really able to process this question adequately, I don't think. If you mean by "my" something like "my personal conception of God" I can tell because it is in my head, as opposed to someone else's. But I'm fairly sure that's not the kind of definition you want.

I think you are making the very simple question a hell of a lot more complicated than asked... whether intentional or reading comprehension, I dunno.

I am fairly sure that the bolded is exactly what Rhea is asking. It is certainly what I have asked. When asking someone what they mean by god, I absolutely mean THEIR meaning when they use the word, not what a church means, not what a book means, not what Saied means, not what Prahana means, not what anyone else means - only what the person using the word means. Why? So I can understand what they are saying. So far, the only thing I understand about what you mean by god is that you don't mean anything like a sprig of basil. That doesn't mean that I assume that anyone else wouldn't but then I have no reason to believe someone else doesn't assume basil is something like god - but I can now safely assume that you don't

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

So how do you distinguish your Christian God from Xiao, the flying monkey of China?

I'm not really able to process this question adequately, I don't think. If you mean by "my" something like "my personal conception of God" I can tell because it is in my head, as opposed to someone else's. But I'm fairly sure that's not the kind of definition you want.

Christianity is an awkward inclusion here. It does not belong to me, and though it has been a very important influence on me over the years, I keep "Christian portrayals of God" bracketed in my head, a significant but not exclusive source of meaning. It's a way of thinking of God, but she is not confined by it, only described.

I guess you mean something like "As a Christian...", but I can't speak for all Christians, as I was accused of doing a few posts up. Christianity describes a social community united by a shared history and resulting in similar cultures and philosophical languages. It is not, and has never been, any particular claim about what God is. Our entire history has been one of schism, from its earliest documents to its modern communities, and the nature of God is a common trigger point. One reason why I stay prudently away from the question as a general rule.

The xiao is more like a mythical beast than a god, I think?

What I get from this post is that "god" is whatever a person claims it is. And god can be merely a claim itself, undefined, kinda like a feeling, emotion, bias or preference.

 

[Rhea]

"
Hmmm , It seems you really didn't accept my reply as an answer after all. It's understandable to "still" want to make use of the "define God" thingy ....being so used to using it for so long.

No, I did. I'm sorry for opening up more questions. I don't remember what made me dive into your reply post, maybe that it posed more questions about whether you had a definition you just hadn't posted yet. But no, you're right, I did accept your answer as the answer you have to the question "Christians, Define your god."

Sorry for the confusion.

It's just so unexpected and weird that so far all of the answers have completely avoided defining the god.

 

[Rhea]

Doesn't it strike you as a little odd than none of the Christians who have responded found the question to be a meaningful one as asked?

~laugh~ yes.
"Describe your god"

"that's not meaningful...

...But you should believe in it."​

 

[Rhea]

The xiao is more like a mythical beast than a god, I think?

Not according to my tour guide in China, who bristled when the tour group chuckled, "You laugh! But this is a true history!"
He thought it was as "non-mythical" as you think your god is.

Does that make you a terrible person for calling his true beliefs mythical?

 

[Rhea]

"You're asking the wrong question" is a perfectly valid response to your query, and the only honest one.

Is a pretty zany answer to the question, "can you define that? Or failing a definition can you at least describe it?"

I just can't make head nor tails of how anyone can "believe" in a thing that they can't distinguish from a hole in the ground to a casual observer.
Let alone consider that thing a "god"

"Well, I don't know if that thing is a high speed muffler bearing or a carbureted electronic headliner, but, by golly, I love it with all my heart and soul!"

 

[Learner]

Doesn't it strike you as a little odd than none of the Christians who have responded found the question to be a meaningful one as asked?

~laugh~ yes.
"Describe your god"

"that's not meaningful...

...But you should believe in it."​

I think Politese meant in the context of the quote below.

If God exists, I don't think he can be defined. How could the source of all things be confined to a physical prison like the rest of us? The Tao which can be named is not the eternal Tao, it is said. And isn't this true of anything eternal? If it has boundaries, then it has an end.

(post# 195 was not neccessary at all, but cheers anyway )

 

[Rhea]

~laugh~ yes.
"Describe your god"
"that's not meaningful...
...But you should believe in it."

I think Politese meant in the context of the quote below.

If God exists, I don't think he can be defined. How could the source of all things be confined to a physical prison like the rest of us? The Tao which can be named is not the eternal Tao, it is said. And isn't this true of anything eternal? If it has boundaries, then it has an end.

I am perplexed as to why you, or Politesse, should think that "infinite" cannot be defined or described.
No this is not "true of anything eternal." Why would it be. We have words to describe eternal, and infinite.

However, what you need words for is to distinguish it from empty space, which could also be described as eternal and infinite, but is not a personal god. I can tell the difference between the two. I'm at a loss as to how you cannot.