How can one say that one has a "different god" then they do?

[Katzpur]

What I believe, with respect to "different gods," is that if I, as a Mormon, pray to my God that my sick child be made well, the same individual hears my prayers as the one who hears a Hindu mother pray that her sick child be made well. We may all perceive Him/Her differently, but the bottom line is that our perceptions have nothing whatsoever to do with who or what God actually is.

 

[Penumbra]

What I believe, with respect to "different gods," is that if I, as a Mormon, pray to my God that my sick child be made well, the same individual hears my prayers as the one who hears a Hindu mother pray that her sick child be made well. We may all perceive Him/Her differently, but the bottom line is that our perceptions have nothing whatsoever to do with who or what God actually is.

That is true. Peoples perceptions do not change reality.

But if there exists one god with a set of attributes, then characterizations that claim a completely different set of attributes that end up being way off are incorrect. Their deity would be a character that differs from the real god so substantially that it's simply an imagined character. It's a different god, much like Zeus and Athena are different gods.

And if none of them are real, then they are all characters and all different.

 

[Katzpur]

But if there exists one god with a set of attributes, then characterizations that claim a completely different set of attributes that end up being way off are incorrect. Their deity would be a character that differs from the real god so substantially that it's simply an imagined character. It's a different god, much like Zeus and Athena are different gods.

But where do you draw the line? How different can one person's perceptions be from another's before the god himself becomes a "different god"? I do understand what you're saying, and to some extent, I agree. But there is one god referred to as the "Abrahamic God." Most Christians see Him as a Trinity. The LDS concept of God differs somewhat from the mainstream Christian concept, but we still believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We even believe they are "one God" -- just "one" in a different way than as defined by the Nicene Creed. Jews and Muslims believe in the Abrahamic God, too, but to them the idea that He has a Son is preposterous. I still think Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe in the same God. Once you get into Eastern religions, it gets a bit more fuzzy.

 

[Penumbra]

But where do you draw the line? How different can one person's perceptions be from another's before the god himself becomes a "different god"? I do understand what you're saying, and to some extent, I agree. But there is one god referred to as the "Abrahamic God." Most Christians see Him as a Trinity. The LDS concept of God differs somewhat from the mainstream Christian concept, but we still believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We even believe they are "one God" -- just "one" in a different way than as defined by the Nicene Creed. Jews and Muslims believe in the Abrahamic God, too, but to them the idea that He has a Son is preposterous. I still think Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe in the same God. Once you get into Eastern religions, it gets a bit more fuzzy.

The line is debatable, but some things I think are pretty straightforward. I don't think they believe in the same god at all. It's not drawn right down the line between those three religions, though. For instance, some Christians and Muslims may have a more similar god concept than two drastically different Christians.

Perhaps an easy way to divide it is to think of it in turns of attributes and personality.

When it comes to attributes, the gods differ. Mormons, and correct me if I'm wrong, believe God the Father has a physical body, that he did not create everything in existence, and that he was once like man. This differs rather drastically from the concept of god being an eternal and unimaginable force that exists outside of spacetime that created all of existence, and for which nothing separate independently exists. This is an extremely large discrepancy in describing different deities. And, when most variants of Christianity are compared to Judaism and Islam, they believe God has a son, who is also part of the godhead, and exists as part of an eternal trinity. Muslims and Jews find this to be incorrect (and for some, blasphemous), and say that god is purely one thing with no separate persons at all. Again, this is a rather large discrepancy.

When it comes to personality, this is arguably the more practical difference. Some people believe god is the most loving thing in existence, full of patience and kindness. Some believe everyone goes to heaven, and/or that god really loves each and every human being. Others view god as a wrathful tyrant, who is willing to torture people infinitely, or infinitely separate beings from him and not allowing them to die. Other views that god along with this is that God is jealous, has committed or commanded genocide, or wants Sharia law, etc. And like I said, it's not drawn between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, although that's there some of the lines are. Gods can differ within religions almost as drastically as they can differ between religions.

Basically, some people would read stuff like this from the Qur'an and say that's their god, while others would say it's the exact opposite:

004.056 Those who reject our Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire: as often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for fresh skins, that they may taste the penalty: for God is Exalted in Power, Wise.

008.054 (Deeds) after the manner of the people of Pharaoh and those before them": They treated as false the Signs of their Lord: so We destroyed them for their crimes, and We drowned the people of Pharaoh: for they were all oppressors and wrong-doers.
008.055 For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.

022.018 Seest thou not that to God bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens and on earth,- the sun, the moon, the stars; the hills, the trees, the animals; and a great number among mankind? But a great number are (also) such as are fit for Punishment: and such as God shall disgrace,- None can raise to honour: for God carries out all that He wills.
022.019 These two antagonists dispute with each other about their Lord: But those who deny (their Lord),- for them will be cut out a garment of Fire: over their heads will be poured out boiling water.
022.020 With it will be scalded what is within their bodies, as well as (their) skins.
022.021 In addition there will be maces of iron (to punish) them.
022.022 Every time they wish to get away therefrom, from anguish, they will be forced back therein, and (it will be said), "Taste ye the Penalty of Burning!"

040.070 Those who reject the Book and the (revelations) with which We sent our apostles: but soon shall they know,-
040.071 When the yokes (shall be) round their necks, and the chains; they shall be dragged along-
040.072 In the boiling fetid fluid: then in the Fire shall they be burned;
040.073 Then shall it be said to them: "Where are the (deities) to which ye gave part- worship-
040.074 "In derogation of God?" They will reply: "They have left us in the lurch: Nay, we invoked not, of old, anything (that had real existence)." Thus does God leave the Unbelievers to stray.
040.075 "That was because ye were wont to rejoice on the earth in things other than the Truth, and that ye were wont to be insolent.
040.076 "Enter ye the gates of Hell, to dwell therein: and evil is (this) abode of the arrogant!"

Gods that people believe in, even in a given religion or collections of related religions, can be more different than Gandhi and Stalin.

 

[Khali-Gaïa_Witch]

ah... but you speak of monotheïsts and there are polytheïsts in the world that believe in more than one God(dess).Take me for example i believe in TWO Goddesses, one that is all that is good(Gaïa) and one that is her counterpart(Khali). Now how is it possible for me to belive in just one almighty when i believe in two???

 

[Katzpur]

When it comes to attributes, the gods differ. Mormons, and correct me if I'm wrong, believe God the Father has a physical body, that he did not create everything in existence, and that he was once like man. This differs rather drastically from the concept of god being an eternal and unimaginable force that exists outside of spacetime that created all of existence, and for which nothing separate independently exists.

I'm not sure how much time to devote to correcting your understanding of Mormon doctrine and how much time to spend actually addressing the topic in more general terms.

Let me begin by stating that Mormons believe everything the Bible has to say about God. We also claim that our beliefs about God were shared by the Christians of Jesus' day, even though they may not be shared by most Christians today. Specifically, you stated that Mormons believe...

(1) "God the Father has a physical body." This is an accurate statement.
(2) "God did not create everything in existence." We do not believe in an ex nihlo creation, if that's what you mean. We believe that He created the spirits of every human being who has ever lived and that He directed the creation (through the pre-mortal Jesus Christ) of our universe and everything in it. We do not believe that He created matter.
(3) "God was once like man." This is a non-doctrinal statement that has been thrown about -- and misinterpreted -- from the time of Joseph Smith. There is nothing in the LDS canon to that effect, and even if there were, it would not necessarily mean what our critics claim it would mean. Jesus Christ was once like man; that did not compromise His divinity in the slightest. If God the Father was also once like man, that doesn't mean He was not just as divine as His Only Begotten Son. This would have been something that took place prior to "the beginning" as recorded in the Bible. Finally, in 62 years of being a Mormon, I have heard reference to this statement a grand total of one time in an LDS worship service.

Now, with respect to "different gods," assume that two individuals were both giving their input on Barack Obama and that you were listening in on their conversation without knowing who in the world they were talking about. Just for kicks, imagine that one of them was Glenn Beck and the other was Harry Reid. I can't imagine that you'd even think they were talking about the same person. You'd get two very different perspectives as to Obama's character, intelligence, and leadership attributes. If a Catholic were telling you about the God he worships and I were telling you about the God I worship, we might describe Him differently, but that wouldn't mean we were speaking of two different gods.

 

[Penumbra]

I'm not sure how much time to devote to correcting your understanding of Mormon doctrine and how much time to spend actually addressing the topic in more general terms.

Let me begin by stating that Mormons believe everything the Bible has to say about God. We also claim that our beliefs about God were shared by the Christians of Jesus' day, even though they may not be shared by most Christians today. Specifically, you stated that Mormons believe...

(1) "God the Father has a physical body." This is an accurate statement.
(2) "God did not create everything in existence." We do not believe in an ex nihlo creation, if that's what you mean. We believe that He created the spirits of every human being who has ever lived and that He directed the creation (through the pre-mortal Jesus Christ) of our universe and everything in it. We do not believe that He created matter.
(3) "God was once like man." This is a non-doctrinal statement that has been thrown about -- and misinterpreted -- from the time of Joseph Smith. There is nothing in the LDS canon to that effect, and even if there were, it would not necessarily mean what our critics claim it would mean. Jesus Christ was once like man; that did not compromise His divinity in the slightest. If God the Father was also once like man, that doesn't mean He was not just as divine as His Only Begotten Son. This would have been something that took place prior to "the beginning" as recorded in the Bible. Finally, in 62 years of being a Mormon, I have heard reference to this statement a grand total of one time in an LDS worship service.

Ok, I got at least 2 out of 3, and apparently the third one isn't necessarily wrong either, but unclear and non canon. I was told that by a Mormon, at least. Thank you for clearing up the third point.

But don't you see an absolutely enormous difference when one person describes god as having a physical body, and another person describes god as being a transcendental force beyond all spacetime, originator of the fabric of existence and all energy and matter? They are drastically different concepts. Some people claim that God is pure consciousness, of which all conscious beings are part of.

Now, with respect to "different gods," assume that two individuals were both giving their input on Barack Obama and that you were listening in on their conversation without knowing who in the world they were talking about. Just for kicks, imagine that one of them was Glenn Beck and the other was Harry Reid. I can't imagine that you'd even think they were talking about the same person. You'd get two very different perspectives as to Obama's character, intelligence, and leadership attributes. If a Catholic were telling you about the God he worships and I were telling you about the God I worship, we might describe Him differently, but that wouldn't mean we were speaking of two different gods.

Glenn Beck would be describing a ridiculous characterization of Obama rather than anything close to what he really is. Even so, Beck and Reid would be far closer to describing the same person than religions are at describing the same god.

To start with, they are both necessarily inspired by the same figure. There really is a guy named Barack Obama, and we can all agree on that. He's also really human, and they both know what he looks like. They both know where he went to school, that he is the current president of the United States, etc.

Religions, on the other hand, can't even agree on what god is. Is he a transcendental force beyond all spacetime, or is he in a physical body that ours looks just like? Is he pure infinite consciousness of which all beings are a subset, or is he a separate being? Does he create hells to torture people, or is that idea ridiculous to him? Is it truly a single god, or are there a god and goddess? Is he a distant watchmaker, or is he a personal and passionate being? Does he care what people do with each other when they are naked, or does he not even notice? Did he have any input into any given religious scripture, or is he just watching as humans make stuff up?

The variety of characters described to be god are more separated than Reid's or Beck's perception of Obama. They're more separated than Gandhi and Stalin, because at least we can agree those two guys are the same species.

Are Zeus and Athena the same god? Or Zeus and Odin? Or Odin and Allah? Or Allah and Brahman? Or Brahman and Jesus?

 

[Katzpur]

Ok, I got at least 2 out of 3, and apparently the third one isn't necessarily wrong either, but unclear and non canon. I was told that by a Mormon, at least. Thank you for clearing up the third point.

No problem. You actually didn't do all that badly.

But don't you see an absolutely enormous difference when one person describes god as having a physical body, and another person describes god as being a transcendental force beyond all spacetime, originator of the fabric of existence and all energy and matter? They are drastically different concepts.

I suppose they are drastically different concepts, but I still feel as if the God I worship has quite a bit in common with the God traditional Christians worship. I know that when I've asked people who believe in the Trinity -- as defined at Nicea in 325 A.D. -- to explain it to me, I get a pretty enormous variety of responses, all coming from people who you'd think would agree pretty closely. If a number of these individuals are all posting on the same thread, inevitably one of them will accuse another of heresy (usually one of them is preaching modalism).

Glenn Beck would be describing a ridiculous characterization of Obama rather than anything close to what he really is.

Yes, that goes without saying.

Even so, Beck and Reid would be far closer to describing the same person than religions are at describing the same god.

I'm not so sure.

To start with, they are both necessarily inspired by the same figure. There really is a guy named Barack Obama, and we can all agree on that. He's also really human, and they both know what he looks like. They both know where he went to school, that he is the current president of the United States, etc.

And I believe that the God of the Christians, Muslims and Jews is the same figure, and that He's real. The fact that we have differences of opinion about Him doesn't change that, at least not to me. I realize that's just how I see it and that you don't see it that way.

 

[Penumbra]

No problem. You actually didn't do all that badly.

Thanks. LDS is a religion for which I've yet to personally read the texts. My knowledge comes only from a handful of Mormons that I've discussed with.

I suppose they are drastically different concepts, but I still feel as if the God I worship has quite a bit in common with the God traditional Christians worship. I know that when I've asked people who believe in the Trinity -- as defined at Nicea in 325 A.D. -- to explain it to me, I get a pretty enormous variety of responses, all coming from people who you'd think would agree pretty closely. If a number of these individuals are all posting on the same thread, inevitably one of them will accuse another of heresy (usually one of them is preaching modalism).

Yes, that goes without saying.

I'm not so sure.

I agree that from observation, Mormons don't disagree any more than other Christian denominations when it comes to the personality of their god. As I mentioned previously, differences within a given religion (in this case, Christianity) can be nearly as drastic as differences between religions. But when it comes to attributes, Mormons are a bit of an outlier from other Christians, believing completely different things regarding god (physical body vs. transcendental force beyond all spacetime). Modalism is in itself a rather drastic difference as well, but I'd say it's significantly less-so than the physical/transcendental difference.

And I believe that the God of the Christians, Muslims and Jews is the same figure, and that He's real. The fact that we have differences of opinion about Him doesn't change that, at least not to me. I realize that's just how I see it and that you don't see it that way.

1) Which version? How far off does one have to be until they no longer really believe in the same god? If two people describe completely opposing gods, but refer to them as the same name, does that mean they believe in the same god? Do the Westboro Baptist Church and a Reformed Jewish Synagogue preach the same god? Do Islamists and Methodists preach the same god?

2) Looking at those verses from the Qur'an I posted, would you say that those are words directly from your god? (With a tiny variance assumed for translation, although I always look at more than one translation) Because Muslims, basically by definition, do believe those words are word-for-word a message from god. Does that accurately describe the personality of your god?

3) Is the fact that you've disregarded non-Abrahamic religions from your latest paragraph an indicator that you agree that, say, Brahman and God the Father are completely and utterly different conceptions to the point where they can't reasonably be called the same thing? And if so, where are you making the cutoff?