God Is Not A Christian

[Skwim]

God is not a Christian.

Speaking from the Christian point of view, I'd have to agree. To be a Christian means that one accepts Jesus Christ as their lord and savior, and I don't think Jesus is god's lord nor does he need any saving. Same pretty much goes for the others. To be Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu, god would have to give up his godly nature and assume that of such people. And in as much as I doubt anyone feels he's done so, he wouldn't qualify.

No single religion/denomination can lay claim that God belongs to them, and them alone.

Sure they can, and even do. Not saying they're right, but then that's not what your claim is about.

If anything, the exact nature of God is unknown.

Depends on whom you ask. A few years back one person here of RF claimed just this.

You can quote whatever holy book that you want, it does not prove anything.

Well, it does prove one can quote holy books and perhaps a have good understanding of them.

It is important to separate the human conceptions of God from what we can actually observe

Why? People will believe whatever they have to regardless of any observation or lack thereof.

To that end, we have to study nature and the cosmos in order to see God's creation at work and evolving

Why is study necessary? Are you saying that studying nature will a give one a better concept of god? Why is this so. Is this what he told you?

God can't be bound in any human system of belief.Nor can God be restricted to one culture or geographic location.

How do you know this to be so?

The exact details about God are unknown, and will remain so until said deity decides to make a personal appearance at a press conference, and goes through a Q&A session.

Where's your evidence. You've made a lot of assertions here, but without an iota of supporting material. Why should anyone believe what you've said?

.

 

[HonestJoe]

How can you legitimately make a whole series of specific pronouncements about what God is and is not while as the same time stating that the exact nature of God is unknown? I can’t help feeling that you’re falling in to the traditional religious line of presenting all sorts of declarations, opinions and rules attributed to a god but whenever these are questioned, responding with the line that “We can’t know the mind of God”.

If God is truly unknown, we can’t even know he is unknown!

 

[Brickjectivity]

God is not a Christian.
God is not Jewish.
God is not Islamic.
God is not a Hindu.

God, as the supreme being, monotheistic deity, or creator of the universe, is not a member of any man made, earth bound religion. No single religion/denomination can lay claim that God belongs to them, and them alone. If anything, the exact nature of God is unknown. You can quote whatever holy book that you want, it does not prove anything.

It is important to separate the human conceptions of God from what we can actually observe...which will be difficult, since God does not make personal appearances and has yet to be captured on camera/video. To that end, we have to study nature and the cosmos in order to see God's creation at work and evolving (incidentally that is the core of deism).

God can't be bound in any human system of belief. Nor can God be restricted to one culture or geographic location. The exact details about God are unknown, and will remain so until said deity decides to make a personal appearance at a press conference, and goes through a Q&A session.

Assuming God is relevant to humanity and that God is not, as you suggest, beholden to any religious camp: in your opinion as a deist what is the relevance of God to humanity? Do you have a logical conclusion that is representative of most deists?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Careful...you are rapidly approaching pandeism. Welcome to the fold!

Haha. In your interpretation, what's pandeism? I know I'm a pantheist and animist but never heard of pandeism?

 

[jonathan180iq]

Maybe God's an atheist.

Implicit or Explicit?

 

[Quintessence]

Yes, primitive people from different regions on earth made up stories about deities. Most likely they did not have a clue what was going on, so they defaulted to the supernatural. The sun is a god. The moon is a goddess. Animals are deified. Comets and eclipses are omens from the god(s).

Yeah, I'm just going to say you've got some misconceptions going on there and leave it at that, given this thread isn't about that.

 

[Neo Deist]

Haha. In your interpretation, what's pandeism? I know I'm a pantheist and animist but never heard of pandeism?

Pantheism: everything is part of an all-encompassing God, but God is still a separate being/entity.
Pandeism: God created the universe and then became part of the universe, ceasing to exist as a separate entity.

 

[Neo Deist]

Yeah, I'm just going to say you've got some misconceptions going on there and leave it at that, given this thread isn't about that.

Misconceptions? Nah.

The ancient Chinese used to think that a solar eclipse was a great dragon eating the sun, and they performed rituals to scare the dragon away, thus returning the sun.

The ancient Aztecs would conduct human sacrifices to appease the gods, and bring back the sun from an eclipse.

Other cultures (like the Egyptians) saw the sun as a god, and it drove across the sky in a chariot or boat. The sun god had children, which were identified by the moon and stars.

They did not have telescopes, satellites or space shuttles, so the exact nature of the cosmos was unknown to them. Human imagination ran wild and religion often dictated the cultural practices associated with cosmic events. It was all BS, but that is to be expected of such primitive people.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Pantheism: everything is part of an all-encompassing God, but God is still a separate being/entity.
Pandeism: God created the universe and then became part of the universe, ceasing to exist as a separate entity.

Patheism is everything in the universe (life) is god
Panentheism (+en) is the def. got is part universe but separate deity
Pandeism is how you defined it but I would have guessed it was god is the universe but seperate from us personally I guess.

 

[Neo Deist]

Patheism is everything in the universe (life) is god

Yes. That is what I stated. Everything is a part of God, but God is a separate entity from the universe, albeit equal to the universe.

Panentheism (+en) is the def. got is part universe but separate deity

Yes, panentheism is that everything is part of God, but God is a separate entity that is above and beyond the universe. Slightly different than pantheism.

Pandeism is how you defined it but I would have guessed it was god is the universe but seperate from us personally I guess.

In pandeism, God became the universe, or that God blended into the universe and is not a separate entity.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't know. Maybe our definitions are a big mixed up or I'm nit picking, but:

Yes. That is what I stated. Everything is a part of God, but God is a separate entity from the universe, albeit equal to the universe.

Everything is god not part of god. There is no separation in pantheism. I think you're mixing up panentheism and pantheism. Which is understandable because, as a deist, you see a deity as a part of the equation (not poking, just saying). However, in pantheism, there is no deity/god.

Yes, panentheism is that everything is part of God, but God is a separate entity that is above and beyond the universe. Slightly different than pantheism.

Panentheism, since I am not one I just looked it up since on RF is everything. It also recognizes that "god" is higher while pantheism is neutral. There is no higher in it. Or beyond or however the case shall be.

The former is just god is everything -not in as an animist and not -part of but is everything.

The latter combines deistic view and pantheism view. God is everything but he is also higher than everything at the same time.

In pandeism, God became the universe, or that God blended into the universe and is not a separate entity.

The only difference between that and pantheism is god is the universe. There is no separate god in pantheism that became anything. He IS everything. He's life. How can one separate life from life (deism), how can one worship life (theism), how can one separate life into gods (polytheism), and how can one see life as everything but higher at the same time (pantheism) while others don't acknowledge god as life at all (atheism).

Don't get it. If one take out the concept or idea of god and just appreciate and be thankful for life itself, then there shouldn't be so much of a mix matched concept of god.

 

[Neo Deist]

I don't know. Maybe our definitions are a big mixed up or I'm nit picking, but:

Everything is god not part of god. There is no separation in pantheism. I think you're mixing up panentheism and pantheism. Which is understandable because, as a deist, you see a deity as a part of the equation (not poking, just saying). However, in pantheism, there is no deity/god.

Panentheism, since I am not one I just looked it up since on RF is everything. It also recognizes that "god" is higher while pantheism is neutral. There is no higher in it. Or beyond or however the case shall be.

The former is just god is everything -not in as an animist and not -part of but is everything.

The latter combines deistic view and pantheism view. God is everything but he is also higher than everything at the same time.

The only difference between that and pantheism is god is the universe. There is no separate god in pantheism that became anything. He IS everything. He's life. How can one separate life from life (deism), how can one worship life (theism), how can one separate life into gods (polytheism), and how can one see life as everything but higher at the same time (pantheism) while others don't acknowledge god as life at all (atheism).

Don't get it. If one take out the concept or idea of god and just appreciate and be thankful for life itself, then there shouldn't be so much of a mix matched concept of god.

I think we are pulling a Clinton and arguing over the definition of "is"...

 

[Deeje]

I believe that the religion that Adam and Eve practiced in the garden of Eden was the only one that God condoned.....It was just worship of the Creator...it had no rituals, no idols, no lengthy set of rules, liturgy or prayers, no imposing buildings or men dressed in fancy clothes with impressive titles

.....it was just pure worship and it didn't need to have a label.

I also believe that this form of worship will be restored when God has allowed humans to see the futility of performing the sorts of worship they have invented for themselves.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Haha.

I think we are pulling a Clinton and arguing over the definition of "is"...

Yeah. It's a very important word:

Jesus is a representation of the living god not IS the living god
God is part of (or higher) everything rather than God IS everything
Life is separate as many gods. Rather than god being life as a whole

Why the confusion? God isn't human. God isn't a part of anything. God isn't a mystery/higher (that's really degrading ourselves). God isn't separate that makes me think of different realms of existences and science fiction.

God is just god.

 

[Neo Deist]

I believe that the religion that Adam and Eve practiced in the garden of Eden was the only one that God condoned.....It was just worship of the Creator...it had no rituals, no idols, no lengthy set of rules, liturgy or prayers, no imposing buildings or men dressed in fancy clothes with impressive titles

.....it was just pure worship and it didn't need to have a label.

I also believe that this form of worship will be restored when God has allowed humans to see the futility of performing the sorts of worship they have invented for themselves.

That would be deism...not that the Garden of Eden story is literal.

As soon as you come on over to the logical side, you can partake of said religion.

 

[Quintessence]

Misconceptions? Nah.

The ancient Chinese used to think that a solar eclipse was a great dragon eating the sun, and they performed rituals to scare the dragon away, thus returning the sun.

The ancient Aztecs would conduct human sacrifices to appease the gods, and bring back the sun from an eclipse.

Other cultures (like the Egyptians) saw the sun as a god, and it drove across the sky in a chariot or boat. The sun god had children, which were identified by the moon and stars.

They did not have telescopes, satellites or space shuttles, so the exact nature of the cosmos was unknown to them. Human imagination ran wild and religion often dictated the cultural practices associated with cosmic events. It was all BS, but that is to be expected of such primitive people.

Wow. Well, glad you enjoy your judgmental ethnocentrism, I guess. It is, unfortunately, not atypical, as current education has not caught up to modern anthropology and is still awash in the ethnocentric crap that was standard practice many decades ago.

 

[Thief]

Maybe God's an atheist.

What?.....God does not belief in Himself?

and the words ...I AM!.....?

 

[Muffled]

God is not a Christian.
God is not Jewish.
God is not Islamic.
God is not a Hindu.

God, as the supreme being, monotheistic deity, or creator of the universe, is not a member of any man made, earth bound religion. No single religion/denomination can lay claim that God belongs to them, and them alone. If anything, the exact nature of God is unknown. You can quote whatever holy book that you want, it does not prove anything.

It is important to separate the human conceptions of God from what we can actually observe...which will be difficult, since God does not make personal appearances and has yet to be captured on camera/video. To that end, we have to study nature and the cosmos in order to see God's creation at work and evolving (incidentally that is the core of deism).

God can't be bound in any human system of belief. Nor can God be restricted to one culture or geographic location. The exact details about God are unknown, and will remain so until said deity decides to make a personal appearance at a press conference, and goes through a Q&A session.

I believe God is emphatically a Christian. He developed the concept and then fulfilled it in Jesus.

I believe that is illogical because it is an a priori position that has not been proven.

I believe He has already done that in Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

I agree, and its only our human nature to bring god down to our level, such as making him into our own image.

I don't believe we can bring God anywhere He doesn't want to go.

I believe that happens and that is why it is important to listen to what God says about Himself.

 

[Muffled]

That may be true. The supreme being does not believe in a higher supreme being.

I believe He believes in Himself.