Difference between revisions of "God"

Latest revision as of 18:33, 18 April 2014

About

God is a family resemblance category (see e.g. [1]) whose most common attributes include:

creator of the universe
omnipotence, including the ability to influence physical events via supernatural means
omniscience
omnipresence
sentience

Despite the nonexistence of any universally-agreed definition of God, there are nonetheless many claims that God is a sentient being who has very specific opinions about how humans should behave, and who will wreak terrible retribution of one sort or another on those who behave in a way that God does not want.

Belief in God is the focus of many religions; these are collectively known as monotheism.

Conclusions

The primary reason for the popularity of "God" as a concept is that it is essentially a memetic virus or worm – an exploit of the brain's reasoning software which causes the cognitive equivalent of a "divide by zero" error.

Although the details vary across religions, God is invariably described in superlative or infinite terms: he can do anything, he created everything – so it is very easy to claim that God is an exception to any rule of rationality. For example, one of God's essential properties is that doesn't have to obey the laws of physics because he created them in the first place; because he created the entire universe, his Plan for it must be as vastly beyond our comprehension as would the history of the East India Company to a single tea-leaf; etc.

Those on whom this exploit succeeds (typically of the authoritarian follower mindset) are then easy prey for powermongers, who tie it together with additional claims about "what God wants" (equivalent to a computer worm's "payload") to elicit obedience. These followers then aid the powermonger in spreading the God meme to other hosts – victims of the symbiotic relationship between meme and powermonger.

Arguments

It is often stated that the existence of God can be neither proven nor disproven.

Believers seem to presume that the default should then be to believe in God, since it can't be proven that he doesn't exist. Bertrand Russell made the counter-argument (Russell's Teapot) that the burden of proof should be on the believer, since it is the believer who is introducing an extra entity without evidence. Otherwise, the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Invisible Pink Unicorn are just as valid objects of belief as is "God".

That said, the non-disprovability of God's existence is actually only true for the most abstract, non-interfering versions of God; for any version of God which claims any specific properties (e.g. God wants us to do, say, or believe certain things), it is meaningful to look for evidence for or against the idea that the creator of the entire universe has these particular wishes.

In short, the argument "you can't prove that God doesn't exist" is a red herring or bait-and-switch; if God's existence has any effect at all, then evidence can be sought. Most nontheists do not object strongly to "inconsequential God"; it is only the versions of God which make specific demands or statements (e.g. homosexuals are an abomination before God) that cause problems because the ideas or beliefs introduced thereby cannot be argued with on their own merit because of the presumed authority of their origin (the creator of the universe).

Communication with

It is frequently claimed that individuals are able to "talk to God" or hear "the voice of God". Some religions allow that this might happen, stating that "God is still speaking", while others state that God only occasionally communicates with humanity on particular momentous occasions (often described as "miraculous").

Issues with the "frequently communicating (FC) God" include:

How can you tell that the voice is that of God rather than being some other part of yourself talking?
How can you tell that the voice is that of God rather than being that of some other deity or powerful entity, possibly even an inimical one (e.g. Satan or one of the hypothetical competing Gods alluded to in item #1 of the Ten Commandments)?
If another speaker-with-God claims that what God has told them blatantly contradicts what God has told you, how do you resolve the contradiction?
- Do you assume that the other person is lying? (Why?)
- Do you assume that the other person is being deceived? (Why? If so, by whom?)
- How can you be sure that the other person is not telling the truth?
- How can you be sure that there is not another God speaking to some people (regardless of who is talking to the "real" God)?
- How can you be sure that God is not in fact talking to both of you but, for unknown reasons of his own, is lying to one of you?
If two people both claim to be in communication with God but the things they each say God has told them are mutually contradictory, how should an objective third party resolve the contradiction? (i.e. who should they believe, and why?)

Contradictions

The Conversations with God books include a number of points which blatantly contradict the word of God as believed by many religions (and of course, many of the words of God as believed by many religions blatantly contradict each other)

Notes

A small sample of FC believers I spoke with stated that they can "just tell", or that they have spoken at length with the voice in question and feel quite certain that it is in fact God, but gave no further details. --Woozle 10:15, 14 February 2007 (EST)

Related Pages

subpages:
Atheism is the disbelief in the likelihood that God exists.
God did it doesn't explain anything.
Members of certain religions often claim that morality requires God, i.e. people only behave morally because of the carrot-and-stick of reward/punishment from God (Heaven/Hell); this would seem to be true only of psychopaths, and not the rest of humanity.
The North Carolina state constitution disqualifies "any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God" from holding government office, which violates the separation of church and state mandated by the US Constitution.

Links

Reference

Wikipedia
Conservapedia
dKosopedia (site down 2008-01-07, can't determine if article exists)
RationalWiki
~~SourceWatch~~: no article as of 2008-01-07

Discussion

If God cares about our salvation wouldn't he use a better sign then a 2000 year old book written by men? at Yahoo! Answers

Humor

2008-02-02 video God the psycho by Pat Condell
2001-09-26 God Angrily Clarifies 'Don't Kill' Rule
Stuff God Hates: a blog
Creator's Rights

Offbeat

2007-09-17 (Omaha, Nebraska) State Senator Ernie Chambers Sues God to prove a point about frivolous lawsuits. 'The lawsuit accuses God "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." .. It says God has caused, "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects, and the like."'

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Overview==
+<hide>
-[[category:concepts]][[category:religion]]Although there are many variations between [[monotheism|monotheistic]] [[religion]]s (and even between different branches of the same religion) on the nature of [[God]], it is generally agreed that God is a [[supernatural]] entity who [[creation|created]] the [[universe]].
+[[category:concepts]]
+[[category:religion]]
+</hide>
+==About==
+[[God]] is a [[family resemblance category]] (see e.g. [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010028587900120]) whose most common {{l/sub|attributes}} include:
+* creator of the universe
+* omnipotence, including the ability to influence physical events via [[supernatural]] means
+* omniscience
+* omnipresence
+* sentience
+Despite the nonexistence of any universally-agreed definition of God, there are nonetheless many claims that God is a sentient being who has very specific opinions about how humans should behave, and who will wreak terrible retribution of one sort or another on those who behave in a way that God does not want.
+Belief in God is the focus of many [[religion]]s; these are collectively known as [[monotheism]].
 ===Conclusions===
 The primary reason for the popularity of "God" as a concept is that it is essentially a [[meme]]tic virus or [[wikipedia:Computer worm|worm]] &ndash; an exploit of the brain's [[reason]]ing software which causes the cognitive equivalent of a "divide by zero" error.
-Although the details vary across religions, God is inevitably described in superlative or infinite terms: he can do anything, he created everything &ndash; so it is very easy to claim that God is an exception to any rule of [[rationality]]. For example, one of God's essential properties is that doesn't have to obey the laws of physics because he created them in the first place; because he created the entire universe, his Plan for it must be as vastly beyond our comprehension as would the history of the East India Company to a single tea-leaf; etc.
+Although the details vary across religions, God is invariably described in superlative or infinite terms: he can do anything, he created everything &ndash; so it is very easy to claim that God is an exception to any rule of [[rationality]]. For example, one of God's essential properties is that doesn't have to obey the laws of physics because he created them in the first place; because he created the entire universe, his Plan for it must be as vastly beyond our comprehension as would the history of the East India Company to a single tea-leaf; etc.
 Those on whom this exploit succeeds (typically of the [[authoritarian follower]] mindset) are then easy prey for [[powermonger]]s, who tie it together with additional claims about "what God wants" (equivalent to a computer worm's "payload") to elicit obedience. These followers then aid the powermonger in spreading the God [[meme]] to other hosts &ndash; victims of the [[symbiosis|symbiotic]] relationship between meme and powermonger.
+===Arguments===
-===Nature of God===
-Details which may vary from belief to belief include:
-* God's '''mortality''' (is God still around?)
-* God's '''omniscience''' (does God know everything, or are God's perceptions limited?)
-* God's '''omnipresence''' (is God everywhere at once, or does God have a specific location?)
-* God's '''omnipotence''' (can God do anything? If he can do "anything" can he violate the laws of logic as well as physics, e.g. "Can God make a stone so heavy that he can't lift it, and then lift it?")
-* God's '''gender''' (is God a He, She, or It?)
-* The nature of God's '''historical interaction with humans''' (which of the stories about God are true, which are true-in-spirit as parables, and which are myths or distortions? Does God have a personality, and if so what is it like?)
-* The nature of God's '''current interaction with humans''' (is God "still speaking", as some churches believe? Can individuals talk directly to God?)
-** The '''importance of humans''' from God's perspective (Does God care about humanity? If so, does God care about us as individuals, or just as a species?)
-** Does God have specific wishes for humans?
-*** Does God punish those who do not obey God's wishes?
-===Existence of God===
 ''see also [[/arguments for]], [[/arguments against]]''
@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 In short, the argument "you can't prove that God doesn't exist" is a [[red herring]] or [[bait-and-switch]]; if God's existence has any effect at all, then evidence can be sought. Most nontheists do not object strongly to "inconsequential God"; it is only the versions of God which make specific demands or statements (e.g. [[God hates gays|homosexuals are an abomination before God]]) that cause problems because the ideas or beliefs introduced thereby cannot be argued with on their own merit because of the presumed [[argument from authority|authority]] of their origin (the creator of the universe).
-===Communication with God===
+===Communication with===
 It is frequently claimed that individuals are able to "talk to God" or hear "the voice of God". Some religions allow that this might happen, stating that "God is [http://stillspeaking.org/ still speaking]", while others state that God only occasionally communicates with humanity on particular momentous occasions (often described as "miraculous").
@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 ** How can you be sure that God is not in fact talking to both of you but, for unknown reasons of his own, is lying to one of you?
 * If two people both claim to be in communication with God but the things they each say God has told them are mutually contradictory, how should an objective third party resolve the contradiction? (i.e. who should they believe, and why?)
-====Examples of speakers-to-God contradicting religious doctrine====
+====Contradictions====
 * The [[wikipedia:Conversations with God|Conversations with God]] books include a number of points which blatantly contradict the word of God as believed by many religions (and of course, many of the words of God as believed by many religions blatantly contradict each other)
 ====Notes====
 A small sample of FC believers I spoke with stated that they can "just tell", or that they have spoken at length with the voice in question and feel quite certain that it is in fact God, but gave no further details. --[[User:Woozle|Woozle]] 10:15, 14 February 2007 (EST)
+==Related Pages==
+* '''subpages''':
+** [[/arguments for]]
+** [[/arguments against]]
+** [[/attributes]]
+* [[Atheism]] is the disbelief in the likelihood that [[God]] exists.
+* [[God did it]] doesn't explain anything.
+* Members of certain [[religion]]s often claim that [[morality requires God]], i.e. people only behave [[moral]]ly because of the [[carrot-and-stick]] of reward/punishment from God (Heaven/Hell); this would seem to be true only of [[psychopath]]s, and not the rest of humanity.
+* The [[North Carolina]] state constitution [[US/NC/religious requirement|disqualifies]] "any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God" from holding government office, which violates the [[separation of church and state]] mandated by the [[US Constitution]].
 ==Links==
@@ Line 54: / Line 64: @@
 * {{conservapedia}}
 * {{dkosopedia}} (site down 2008-01-07, can't determine if article exists)
+* {{rationalwiki}}
 * <s>{{sourcewatch}}</s>: no article as of 2008-01-07
-==Related Pages==
+===Discussion===
-* [[Atheism]] is the disbelief in the likelihood of the existence of [[God]]
-* [[Arguments for the existence of God]]
-* Believers in God often claim that [[morality requires God]], i.e. people only behave [[moral]]ly because of the [[carrot-and-stick]] of reward/punishment from God (Heaven/Hell); this would seem to be true only of [[psychopath]]s, and not the rest of humanity.
-* The [[North Carolina]] state constitution disqualifies "any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God" from holding government office.
-==Discussion Links==
 * [http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061125202002AAzx3I8 If God cares about our salvation wouldn't he use a better sign then a 2000 year old book written by men?] at Yahoo! Answers
-==Humor==
+===Humor===
 * '''2008-02-02 video''' [[youtube:G5JtxrR6msg|God the psycho]] by [[Pat Condell]]
 * '''2001-09-26''' [http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28151 God Angrily Clarifies 'Don't Kill' Rule]
 * [http://stuffgodhates.wordpress.com/ Stuff God Hates]: a blog
 * [[htwiki:Creator's Rights|Creator's Rights]]
+===Offbeat===
-==Offbeat==
+* '''2007-09-17''' [[URL/to file::http://www.ketv.com/news/14133442/detail.html|(Omaha, Nebraska) State Senator Ernie Chambers Sues God]] to prove a point about frivolous lawsuits. 'The lawsuit accuses God "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." .. It says God has caused, "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects, and the like."'
-* '''2007-09-17''' [http://www.ketv.com/news/14133442/detail.html (Omaha, Nebraska) State Senator Ernie Chambers Sues God] to prove a point about frivolous lawsuits. 'The lawsuit accuses God "of making and continuing to make terroristic threats of grave harm to innumerable persons, including constituents of Plaintiff who Plaintiff has the duty to represent." .. It says God has caused, "fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects, and the like."'