God Is a Problem

[Aupmanyav]

What does "God" refer to in your religion or culture?

You know, in Advaita Hinduism it is Brahman, which I do not consider a God, others may do so.
However, while on forums with Christians and Muslims, I write God, otherwise I would have to go in great details to explain what I mean.
I have not found a Hindu Forum suitable for me because I am a Hindu atheist.

 

[Colt]

Yes - every person who believes in God has their own idea of what "God" means.

... but you suggested that there's one shared "general concept."



I'm not aware of a single general concept. I'm not even sure whether a lot of "God" concepts are internally coherent.

From the way most theists describe God, it sounds like they're talking about a real, physical thing and not - say - an abstract concept, but then they say things like "God is love."

I said “generic”.

 

[Colt]

So they wouldn't share your concept of "creator and upholder of the universe".

Ask around.

 

[Vinayaka]

You know, in Advaita Hinduism it is Brahman, which I do not consider a God, others may do so.
However, while on forums with Christians and Muslims, I write God, otherwise I would have to go in great details to explain what I mean.
I have not found a Hindu Forum suitable for me because I am a Hindu atheist.

How about atheist forums?

 

[Ebionite]

Do you agree that use of the term is problematic outside of your own religion or culture? If not, how do you reconcile the differences? If so, what do you think can be done to communicate what is being referred to in interfaith dialogue or conversations with the non-religious?

Yes, it's problematic. It can be resolved by using the original language. For example, for the Abrahamic religions you could use YHWH, Elohim, El, Theos, or Allah.

 

[Kenny]

How many of your congregation died?

0

 

[Heyo]

Ask around.

I did. Here, on other forums and IRL. The conclusion was that there is not a single attribute that is common to all conceptions of gods.

 

[Revoltingest]

The term God itself, going back to the issue in the OP, is just used by cult leaders to differentiate themselves from other cult leaders. In marketing one has to differentiate themselves from the competition so that their business can thrive.

This is partially why the definition of god changes even with christians. From the Yahweh of the bible who is purely monotheistic, to Yaldabaoth the evil God, to Jesus being God, to God being a trinity, to unitarianism, to the JW definition of God. They are all marketing ploys to rally people to their side or to even make the originator of said concept feel special so that they believe they have some new enlightening knowledge of god which makes them the "true" believer who all "righteous" people must follow.

Added to this values must conflict with others to gain support and to benefit the puppeteer, because they exist for narcissitic reasons in the first place.

They cannot unite because then the group is no longer special and then weaker cult leaders cannot compete. So unification is impossible.

Very complicated.
I like the simplicity of atheism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Try reading the OP instead of assuming what the the thread is about by reading the title.

OK.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, it's problematic. It can be resolved by using the original language. For example, for the Abrahamic religions you could use YHWH, Elohim, El, Theos, or Allah.

The challenge with that would be getting used to it, and learning a bit. But yes, one solution would be to stop using 'God' completely. I've considered using 'Siva' all the time, but that also means different things to different people, and nothing to most.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, it's problematic. It can be resolved by using the original language. For example, for the Abrahamic religions you could use YHWH, Elohim, El, Theos, or Allah.

If I heard someone call their god "Theos" (Edit: in an English conversation, anyhow), I would assume that they were trying to differentiate their god from "God."

 

[Revoltingest]

We have a lot of evidence right here on this very forum to the contrary.

They all understand it.
They just don't agree.

 

[Ebionite]

The challenge with that would be getting used to it, and learning a bit. But yes, one solution would be to stop using 'God' completely. I've considered using 'Siva' all the time, but that also means different things to different people, and nothing to most.

You could add descriptive phrase that adds meaning or clears up the ambiguity.

 

[Vinayaka]

You could add descriptive phrase that adds meaning or clears up the ambiguity.

Fair enough, but you'd have to add them each time. Not sure if I could do it justice in one phrase.

 

[Ebionite]

If I heard someone call their god "Theos" (Edit: in an English conversation, anyhow), I would assume that they were trying to differentiate their god from "God."

Yes, that would be appropriate. "God" can refer to a religious construct that is not the same as Theos.

 

[Heyo]

If I heard someone call their god "Theos" (Edit: in an English conversation, anyhow), I would assume that they were trying to differentiate their god from "God."

I use "theos" (and "deos") when I want to explain the difference between a Theist and a Deist. (And when I want to annoy some members who don't understand why a Deist is technically an a-theist.)

 

[Ebionite]

Fair enough, but you'd have to add them each time. Not sure if I could do it justice in one phrase.

In Hebrew a word can be added to indicate a role. YHWH Tzboath means YHWH is his capacity as commander-in-chief.

 

[Vinayaka]

In Hebrew a word can be added to indicate a role. YHWH Tzboath means YHWH is his capacity as commander-in-chief.

I like that. In Saivism, my sect, we have three perfections, which could be seen as roles. The challenge, for people like me, is I don't know Hebrew.

 

[Colt]

I did. Here, on other forums and IRL. The conclusion was that there is not a single attribute that is common to all conceptions of gods.

But you know what the term gods mean.

 

[Ebionite]

I like that. In Saivism, my sect, we have three perfections, which could be seen as roles. The challenge, for people like me, is I don't know Hebrew.

You could apply the same idea to the original language of Saivism.